It takes time to go from no debate to a mature debate, from taboo to open discussion. It's a bit like introducing democracy. You can't just give people the right to vote and expect a Russia to become a Norway overnight. Institutions need to stabilize, stable political camps must be formed, people must learn to think in a new way. That process can take many years, and you have no guarantee of success.

It's the same, I think, when a taboo breaks. Challenging the taboo and breaking it is only the first step. Taboos polarize people into simple black-white opposites, so the next step is to replace those opposites with a broad spectrum of views. The fact of the taboo got in the way of the subject itself, shaped the whole debate into two camps with simplistic views. Now it's time to leave those camps behind, and explore the rest of the terrain. Only then can you have a real discussion about the subject.

There has been a taboo on the dark side of Islam in Norway, connected to the taboo on the dark side of immigration. It used to be that anyone who said something negative about immigrants, their culture and religion, was suspected of being a racist or a bigot. Those taboos are now gone. Not fully, but a half-taboo is no taboo.

Many people may disagree with you if you criticize Islam, and they may even try to brand you as a bigot, (as with Carl I. Hagen's out of context quotes this summer). But disagreement is not the same as censorship, even when the people who disagree with you are in the majority, use unfair rhetorics and unfair tactics. As long as they can't shut you out, as long as they are forced to take what you say seriously, you're no longer suffering under a taboo. You may suffer many things, but not that. They can't make you a pariah. Their words are just words.

That is what I believe has happened in Norway. It began with fringe political movements, took hold on internet discussion groups, and gradually made its way into the mainstream, helped along the way by the acts of Muslim terrorists. The taboo is now gone and irrelevant. It's not coming back. We have to acknowledge that, or we'll be stuck in whiny "everybody hates us"-mode. Phase 1 is over: It's okay to criticize Islam.

Now comes the fun part: Creating an honest, open debate about Islam, where all views are heard, and all aspects of Islam discussed. We're not there yet, we're not even close. Reading all the Islam debates in this blog lately gives me an idea of what that larger debate should look like - broad, open, with all the extremes covered, from Islamists to Islamophobes, and all the views in between. Making that happen in the mainstream media will be a challenge, but we can begin by making it happen out here.

Ok then. I believe Islam is in fundamental conflict with Western values. It does not seek accommodation and seeks to suppress all thought that is in conflict with Islam or critical of it. It is anti-rational and misogynist. Wherever it is ascendant ,it seeks to impose its values on that society to the exclusion of other values. As such, I believe that Islam represents a threat to the West and Western values.

Ditto, Herbie.

The stories of mischief caused by emigrant muslims suggests a significant and ominous trend.
Islam is arrogant, destructive, and backward.
Islam is a very primitive religion. Islamic countries are very primitive places which is why so many educated muslims want to move away from their home countries.

Good choice, Bjørn.

The reason why people like me keep coming back to your blog, even though we may disagree with your views sometimes, is precisely because we are ALLOWED to disagree here. That sets you above the crowd today in Europe. Your blog has the potential of becoming one of the most important and "cutting-edge" discussion forums in Scandinavia on subjects such as this. Embrace the opportunity. The mainstream media aren't up to the job, as they are too scared. We have to drag them by the hair.

Viva le Blogosphere!

My contribution to this discussion for today is to remind you all to read David Pryce-Jones's The Closed Circle: An Interpretation of the Arabs.

The value of this book is to give Westerners like the ones who post here an analysis of Arab society that accounts for many of the aspects of Islam we find so disturbing (like it's OK to lie to kufrs, the humiliation-revenge nexus, the abuse of women, "me against my brother, me and my brother against my cousin," etc). Without an understanding of Arab traditional society, it's impossible to understand Islam as we see it practiced today.

Now before the usual suspects jump on me because I haven't been nuanced, please understand that I'm just mentioning a useful tool for interpreting events. The mass media rarely gets into this level of detail. If you don't like the book, fine. But please take a look at it, especially the early parts. I admit I got bogged down somewhere in the middle.

If a discussion is beginning, Norway is going to need books by Victor David Hansen and others about what is going on.

And the papers should start printing some of their columns.

Whether they agree with the premise or not.

Maybe you should set up a link to purchase said books so we can support your site.

But Norwegian papers will not print ideas that are not politically correct. That would not be the Norwegian way. Much better to pretend everything is okay, as long as possible. No, muslims are not committing hate crimes. Islam is the religion of peace. Submit and all will be well for Europe.

I think it is wrong to generalise this big a group of people so much as many of the comments here are doing. I think the other article Bjørn wrote about the fact that one has to look at the people to get the understanding of a religion is well written and has many good thoughts, in regards to this type of generalising. Besides, I think Europe is being strong and fair, and for once feel a lot of pride for being European. Usually Europe follows USA in thinking, but now that it is politically correct to hate islam in US, then the European countries say that this is not something we want to be a part of.

One of the things I like about this blog is that people actually write things here. This is in stark contrast to the vast majority of blogs, most of which tend to be deserted wastelands of insignificance. In my opinion this one is an exception from time to time, notably your thread on Beslan Bjørn. But then of course it's the inevitable return to sillyness. while I certainly agree that Islam is a POSSIBLE topic for discussion, so is the formation of lint. And just like the formation of lint, its and interesting phenomenom, however, not terribly interesting to discuss. The reason being that after stating what lint is, its physical features and its relative frequency, THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO SAY OBJECTIVELY. One could, of course, argue back and forth SUBJECTIVELY about the merits and demrits of lint. Presumably, one could also argue in a normative and positive way about said topic, but one would still not advance on the original position, lint is lint is lint ad infinitum.

Similarly, I think it is fultile, indeed a waste of time to discuss religion, and yes Islam is still a religion NOT a political movement, despite your frantic belligerence Ali. Now of course, none of you are REALLY interested in discussing Islam, only its connexion with terrorism. Fair enough, but what do you hope to acheive? Unless you do as Carl I., other zealous christian fundamentalists, bigoted secularlists and implied by our leaders, the champions of "democracy", and claim that Islam is inherently evil, you will not have much to say. Furthermore, it can hardly be said to be objective.

Now I am certain that I will get angry rants about me upholding the taboos that BS talks about in the above thread. I would argue that I do not, I hold no particular fondness for Islam, in fact I find the whole Sharia business revolting. But that is NOT the religion. Jihad I suppose IS part of their religion, inasmuch as it is directly mentioned in the Kuran. And I reckon it's legitimate to discuss the USE of Jihad. Jihad as it is interpreted by terrorists is, for lack of a better word, evil. However, I think these issues are separate from the codified, dogma of Islam. Similarly, the Gospel of St. Thomas and the dead sea scrols cannot be said to be part of Christianity/Judaism.

So, rather than discussing Islam, where to begin? there is no unbiased way of approaching it etc., we MAY discuss to what extent the guise of religion/Islam is exploited for political ends. Quit being reproachful BS it doesn't become you. It is time we get past our xenophobia and begin acting as we preach. Fundamentalist Islamic beliefs and Sharia are naturally hard to swallow for civilised Europeans although it should be relatively compatible with evagelist hardliners' dogma.

Oh, and Ms P. I don't see what good having these writers writing columns in our newpapers will help. Ignorance and biasedness will still be rife and mutual "understanding" will not have improved. Leave Islam to the faithful people. The faith is not dangerous in itself, but politicised it is explosive. Just as any dogmatic human construction.

And finally: it's time to rethink our approach to terrorism. Surely if the stronger than all approach had worked there would be LESS terrorism now than in 2001, but the opposite has happened. Accept it or join the armed forces firebrands.

I am very glad seeing my dear great religion, Islam, being the most talked about topic in the world.

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh ) said in famous hadith:

"This matter (Islam) will keep spreading as far as the night and day reach, until Allah will not leave a house but will make this religion enter it ''

True, very true. In the far remote parts of Scandinavia we see natives embracing Islam, in Iceland, this isolated far away island, Islam is spreading there among the locals so rapidly.

http://www.islam.is/

In Latin America and North America, Islam is spreading so fast, in Asia and Africa and in Europe.

http://www.islamic.no/

Islam is now truly the world's only ideological super power.

Geir: "The reason being that after stating what lint is, its physical features and its relative frequency, THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO SAY OBJECTIVELY."

Then let's begin by describing the sociological features and relative frequency of the various forms of Islam. If you think that's too easy to bother with, you haven't read any of the debates on Islam in this blog. People disagree about even the most basic features of Islam. How do you propose we work our way towards the truth, except by discussion?

"Now of course, none of you are REALLY interested in discussing Islam, only its connexion with terrorism."

Hm, none of us? Not true. My view is that Islam is a lot more than terrorism. I want to understand Islam as a whole, not just the parts of it I'm against.

"Unless you do as Carl I., other zealous christian fundamentalists, bigoted secularlists and implied by our leaders, the champions of "democracy", and claim that Islam is inherently evil, you will not have much to say."

Carl I. Hagen has never claimed that Islam is inherently evil.

"Now I am certain that I will get angry rants about me upholding the taboos that BS talks about in the above thread."

Even if you wanted to uphold the taboo, you could not. That's my point - the change is irrevocable. But I'm actually not sure what you're trying to say here. First you say that it's not very interesting to discuss Islam, then you argue that Islam is not political, and that it's not inherently evil. Sounds to me like you're discussing Islam.

And why does it matter that there's no unbiased way to discuss Islam? There's no unbiased way to discuss anything. What matters is that we try, and to do that we need 1) a discussion in the first place, and 2) to do our best to improve it. The alternative is to form views based on faith. That may be okay for Muslims, but not for outsiders trying to understand Islam.

Islam is both a religion and a political system. The legal structure embodied within Islam is quite detailed and comprehensive. Islam is, in fact, a totalitarian system like no other-with strict rules encompassing body, mind, and soul.

Islam is directly connected with terrorism, from funding to indoctrination to execution. The western world is waking up to the threat from Islam. Bin Laden suffered from premature catastrophication. He woke up the sleeping enemy. The forces of the faithful were not quite ready to complete the triumph. Now the clash will be on a genuinely civilizational scale.

Personally I don't trust those Norwegians. They look kinda shifty, and who knows when they might revert to form and start building longboats to rape and pillage their way across europe?

Ex-Christian
Your comments are very similar to ones made by communists at the height of the cold war.
But things didn't work out so well for their psuedo religious ideology. I guess you can't believe every prophesy you here. Especially ones coming from rapists and murderers.

Hi D:

Islam is not communism, you dont need to be very intelligent to notice that.

Ex-Christian,
I never said it was.

But speaking of intelligence, only a drooling retard would believe that Jews eat the blood of children.

Wouldn't you agree? ;)

D:

And only fools would believe there are virgins chained to rocks in paradise.

Dont you agree ? loooooool

"Islam is not communism, you dont need to be very intelligent to notice that."

True. It's a lot worse. Even communists didn't rejoice in having their children blowing themselves up in buses or cafes.

Hi Ali:

you are at it again ? spreading your usuall 'kit' of hate sites against Islam and adding ' false ' translation to articles from Swedish to incite more hate against Muslims ?

Listen mate, we are here to stay wether you like it or not, stop wasting your time, Allah almighty said in the Noble Quran about people like you:

'' They (the disbelievers) want to extinguish Allâh's Light (Islâm) with their mouths, but Allâh will not allow except that His Light should be perfected even though the Kâfirûn (disbelievers) hate (it) '' The Noble Quran 9:32

True, very true, Islam is spreading all over the world and you cant do anything about it, sad isnt ? loooooooool.

Bjørn: "My view is that Islam is a lot more than terrorism."

That's not a very daring statement. I am curious if anyone would disagree with that??

I think discussing _Islam_ is essentially a waste of time and such enterprises usually quickly bog down into 7th grade pissing matches between the faithful (comme le messieur ex-christian), the islamophobes (comme ali dashti) and the self righteously non-aligned (comme moi).

On the other hand, I think discussing the behavior of _Muslims_ in particular places and times is perfectly appropriate.

The Muslims I've known are generally well-educated and live away from their home countries (they've usually fled some sort of repressive home regime). My experience may not be typical, but I don't see any reason that most Muslims in search of a higher quality of life wouldn't be open to secularism (neophyte ardor of Ex-Christian notwithstanding).

But in the specifically European context there are problem groups as well and ignoring them isn't helpful.

1. You have to be deaf, dumb and blind (or just plainly stupid) to not recognize that there is a small subset of Muslims who are extremely dangerous to rational human beings and western secular society. They're generally not hard to find and they're pretty open about it. They have no hope of conquering the world for their religion but they can do more damage than I'd like and they obviously have no scruples against killing lots of folks, lots and lots of folks.

2. There's also a Muslim non-assimilating undereducated and unemployable underclass in a number of European countries (France, maybe Sweden especially), a kind of disastrous chemistry between the western welfare ideal that seeks to aid the needy and those with no shame in exploiting such a system for all it's worth. I think in this case religion is less a cause than general lack of education and cultural factors but when such unsucessful groups seek solace, it will generally be in a retrograde harsh form of religion.

Michael: well said

Why MUSLIMS are the only solution left for Europe to survive:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2248531.stm

Japan has embraced automation and advanced technology to deal with its labor shortage. Japan will not be importing muslim workers, for obvious reasons of self preservation.
Europe's institutions are gauged toward people with certain cultural and intellectual outlooks. They cannot cope with cultures as alien as those of the muslim third world.
I believe that a combination of automation, machine intelligence, and life extension, will allow Europe to do very nicely without the necessary violence of a muslim invasion.
Let the muslims make their own lands a paradise, and rejoice there in their lands, their families, and their God. Let the muslims embrace peace and give up thoughts of world conquest.

Piotr Vendovich

''Let the muslims make their own lands a paradise, and rejoice there in their lands, their families, and their God. Let the muslims embrace peace and give up thoughts of world conquest. ''

I find your comments really pathetic, it is the muslims who are conquered and their land invaded not the other way around, do Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Kashmir and Mindinao Islands ring any bells ???

Ex-Christian, nothing against Muslims (I like almost all the Muslims I've known personally) but if Muslim (or any other other) immigrants aren't interested in learning the local language, adapting to local culture (including keeping the state out of the mosque and the mosque out of the state) then as far as I'm concerned they don't need to be leaving their homelands. Total assimilation isn't necessary but adaptation and accomodation are.

I was heartened by the way that French Muslims closed ranks with the non-Muslim French majority over the hostages/veil issue so that a previous political/religious issue has been neutralized for the time being. I wish more US bloggers had noted that.

Michael:

The thing you always forget is that many muslims in the west ( including me ) are not immigrants but rather native Europeans, where do you suggest us to go?? can you enlighten us please ?

Michael, you may not be aware that Islam in France is supported by the government in a very big way. It pays the muslim authorities to cooperate with the French government. Those who don't have their funds cut off, and are often deported.

What a sad sob story about conquered muslim lands! She may have forgotten Andalusia!

Of course, when muslims conquered other lands, it is assumed they would stay muslim forever! But then, that wouldn't be in accord with human history, would it? Conquest occurs by one group, then another, then another . . . Muslims seem to feel that their conquests should be the lasting ones, but things do not work that way.

Ann:

Can you tell us how Islam reached Indonesia and Malaysia ?

Ann, as a former muslim, I must tell you that muslims really don't get it. They think "once a muslim, always a muslim--or else!" That applies to people, nations, and regions. The sweep of history seems to have passed many muslims by, and they don't realize there's no going back.

"The thing you always forget is that many muslims in the west ( including me ) are not immigrants but rather native Europeans, where do you suggest us to go?? can you enlighten us please ?"

Don't go anywhere, but remember that the fact that you have a new religion doesn't give you the right to ignore the civil, secular laws of your country. As long as you remember that, everything will be copasetic.

Ann : I know something about that, but according to more than one report, after the kidnappings, even imams who were encouraging defiance of the ban turned around and said that Moslem students should respect that particular law. I don't much care about their motivation as the fact that they did the right thing. (I'm not a Christian, but I follow the old protestant line about doing the right thing and letting the motivations take care of themselves).

I find this whole discussion amusing.

Let me spell it out.
Muslims, Christians, Hindus, etc all fighting over the significance of Snow White, Santa Claus and the Tooth fairy.

GET REAL PEOPLE!!! they all are a fricking fairy tale. Always were and always will be. Religion is nothing but a set of restrictive rules written by the fat cats to keep you the dumb rabble in place so they could rape and pillage you with your devoted permission.

ANY RELIGION OR FAIRY TALE THAT EXPLOITS PEOPLE AND DOESN'T PROTECT, EDUCATE, INSPIRE AND BUILD UP SOCIETY IS WRONG.
GOT IT ?????

This isn't tough. Wake up..

They are rules made up by you.
Its your make believe god.
You burn in your hell.
Leave me out of your ignorant backward existence.

I'm a new Finnish Muslim and I must say that the debate tends to whirl around immigration and integration issues. As a Finn I support the integration of foreign Muslims into their new societies but not at the expence of Islam. We must recognize that Islam is not a foreign or anti-Western religion. Where's the basis of this absurd claim anyway? When you think of Christianity you see that it's no more Scandinavian than Islam. Swedish invaders brought Christianity to Finland for example.

I'm both Muslim and Westerner. There's no conflict between these two identities. I'm critical towards my own culture and its bad sides such as drinking alcohol and violence (also strengthened by alcohol).

I see a clear difference between people's culture and Islam so I don't see any problem in critisizing people. Don't think only Muslims have problems. We're but humans though our perfect religion is from God Himself.

Errore humanum est.

Trackback URL: /cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/793