Hodjanernes Blog

13 marts 2006

Hvor mange terrorister er der i Danmark?

Nu vi taler om, hvor mange muhammedanere der går ind for det ene eller det andet, må vi jo ikke glemme den Britiske Efterretningstjenestes tal, der kom frem sidste år:

“AEI resident scholar Michael Rubin said that while only 1 percent of British Muslims are suspected of terrorism by MI5, the UK’s security service, this translates to 16,000 suspected terrorists in a country with 1.6 million Muslims. “

AEI

Hvis vi godtager det ‘officielle’ tal, der bliver opgivet herhjemme på 200.000 muhammedanere, så har vi allerede nu 2.000 personer, der kan mistænkes for terrorisme, hvis vi er sammenlignelige med UK!

I  Sverige giver samme beregning 5.000 potentielle terrorister.

Jeg har ikke det norske tal.

D.v.s. at vi nu idag i Skandinavien har mindst 7.000!!

Frankrig, Holland og Tyskland tør jeg næsten ikke begynde at tænke på.

Var der nogen, der fornylig beklagede sig over, at justitsministeren overførte store ressourcer til efterretningstjeneste her i landet? Hvor store ressourcer skal der til for at mandsopdække 2.000 personer?

“For God’s Sake, Please Stop the Aid!”

Filed under: Afrika, Danmark, EU, Europa, Politik, Politisk korrekte, Tyskland — Tags: , , , — Hodja @ 16:04

The Kenyan economics expert James Shikwati, 35, says that aid to Africa does more harm than good.

The avid proponent of globalization spoke with SPIEGEL about the disastrous effects of Western development policy in Africa, corrupt rulers, and the tendency to overstate the AIDS problem. 4. july 2005.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Shikwati, the G8 summit at Gleneagles is about to beef up the development aid for Africa…

Shikwati: … for God’s sake, please just stop.

SPIEGEL: Stop? The industrialized nations of the West want to eliminate hunger and poverty.

Shikwati: Such intentions have been damaging our continent for the past 40 years. If the industrial nations really want to help the Africans, they should finally terminate this awful aid. The countries that have collected the most development aid are also the ones that are in the worst shape. Despite the billions that have poured in to Africa, the continent remains poor. SPIEGEL: Do you have an explanation for this paradox?

Shikwati: Huge bureaucracies are financed (with the aid money), corruption and complacency are promoted, Africans are taught to be beggars and not to be independent. In addition, development aid weakens the local markets everywhere and dampens the spirit of entrepreneurship that we so desperately need. As absurd as it may sound: Development aid is one of the reasons for Africa’s problems. If the West were to cancel these payments, normal Africans wouldn’t even notice. Only the functionaries would be hard hit. Which is why they maintain that the world would stop turning without this development aid.

SPIEGEL: Even in a country like Kenya, people are starving to death each year. Someone has got to help them.

Shikwati: But it has to be the Kenyans themselves who help these people. When there’s a drought in a region of Kenya, our corrupt politicians reflexively cry out for more help. This call then reaches the United Nations World Food Program — which is a massive agency of apparatchiks who are in the absurd situation of, on the one hand, being dedicated to the fight against hunger while, on the other hand, being faced with unemployment were hunger actually eliminated. It’s only natural that they willingly accept the plea for more help. And it’s not uncommon that they demand a little more money than the respective African government originally requested. They then forward that request to their headquarters, and before long, several thousands tons of corn are shipped to Africa …

SPIEGEL: … corn that predominantly comes from highly-subsidized European and American farmers …

Shikwati: … and at some point, this corn ends up in the harbor of Mombasa. A portion of the corn often goes directly into the hands of unsrupulous politicians who then pass it on to their own tribe to boost their next election campaign. Another portion of the shipment ends up on the black market where the corn is dumped at extremely low prices. Local farmers may as well put down their hoes right away; no one can compete with the UN’s World Food Program. And because the farmers go under in the face of this pressure, Kenya would have no reserves to draw on if there actually were a famine next year. It’s a simple but fatal cycle.

SPIEGEL: If the World Food Program didn’t do anything, the people would starve.

Shikwati: I don’t think so. In such a case, the Kenyans, for a change, would be forced to initiate trade relations with Uganda or Tanzania, and buy their food there. This type of trade is vital for Africa. It would force us to improve our own infrastructure, while making national borders — drawn by the Europeans by the way — more permeable. It would also force us to establish laws favoring market economy.

SPIEGEL: Would Africa actually be able to solve these problems on its own? Shikwati: Of course. Hunger should not be a problem in most of the countries south of the Sahara. In addition, there are vast natural resources: oil, gold, diamonds. Africa is always only portrayed as a continent of suffering, but most figures are vastly exaggerated. In the industrial nations, there’s a sense that Africa would go under without development aid. But believe me, Africa existed before you Europeans came along. And we didn’t do all that poorly either.

SPIEGEL: But AIDS didn’t exist at that time.

Shikwati: If one were to believe all the horrorifying reports, then all Kenyans should actually be dead by now. But now, tests are being carried out everywhere, and it turns out that the figures were vastly exaggerated. It’s not three million Kenyans that are infected. All of the sudden, it’s only about one million. Malaria is just as much of a problem, but people rarely talk about that.

SPIEGEL: And why’s that?

Shikwati: AIDS is big business, maybe Africa’s biggest business. There’s nothing else that can generate as much aid money as shocking figures on AIDS. AIDS is a political disease here, and we should be very skeptical.

SPIEGEL: The Americans and Europeans have frozen funds previously pledged to Kenya. The country is too corrupt, they say. Shikwati: I am afraid, though, that the money will still be transfered before long. After all, it has to go somewhere. Unfortunately, the Europeans’ devastating urge to do good can no longer be countered with reason. It makes no sense whatsoever that directly after the new Kenyan government was elected — a leadership change that ended the dictatorship of Daniel arap Mois — the faucets were suddenly opened and streams of money poured into the country.

SPIEGEL: Such aid is usually earmarked for a specific objective, though.

Shikwati: That doesn’t change anything. Millions of dollars earmarked for the fight against AIDS are still stashed away in Kenyan bank accounts and have not been spent. Our politicians were overwhelmed with money, and they try to siphon off as much as possible. The late tyrant of the Central African Republic, Jean Bedel Bokassa, cynically summed it up by saying: “The French government pays for everything in our country. We ask the French for money. We get it, and then we waste it.”

SPIEGEL: In the West, there are many compassionate citizens wanting to help Africa. Each year, they donate money and pack their old clothes into collection bags …

Shikwati: … and they flood our markets with that stuff. We can buy these donated clothes cheaply at our so-called Mitumba markets. There are Germans who spend a few dollars to get used Bayern Munich or Werder Bremen jerseys, in other words, clothes that that some German kids sent to Africa for a good cause. After buying these jerseys, they auction them off at Ebay and send them back to Germany — for three times the price. That’s insanity …

SPIEGEL: … and hopefully an exception.

Shikwati: Why do we get these mountains of clothes? No one is freezing here. Instead, our tailors lose their livlihoods. They’re in the same position as our farmers. No one in the low-wage world of Africa can be cost-efficient enough to keep pace with donated products. In 1997, 137,000 workers were employed in Nigeria’s textile industry. By 2003, the figure had dropped to 57,000. The results are the same in all other areas where overwhelming helpfulness and fragile African markets collide. SPIEGEL: Following World War II, Germany only managed to get back on its feet because the Americans poured money into the country through the Marshall Plan. Wouldn’t that qualify as successful development aid?

Shikwati: In Germany’s case, only the destroyed infrastructure had to be repaired. Despite the economic crisis of the Weimar Republic, Germany was a highly- industrialized country before the war. The damages created by the tsunami in Thailand can also be fixed with a little money and some reconstruction aid. Africa, however, must take the first steps into modernity on its own. There must be a change in mentality. We have to stop perceiving ourselves as beggars. These days, Africans only perceive themselves as victims. On the other hand, no one can really picture an African as a businessman. In order to change the current situation, it would be helpful if the aid organizations were to pull out.

SPIEGEL: If they did that, many jobs would be immediately lost …

Shikwati: … jobs that were created artificially in the first place and that distort reality. Jobs with foreign aid organizations are, of course, quite popular, and they can be very selective in choosing the best people. When an aid organization needs a driver, dozens apply for the job. And because it’s unacceptable that the aid worker’s chauffeur only speaks his own tribal language, an applicant is needed who also speaks English fluently — and, ideally, one who is also well mannered. So you end up with some African biochemist driving an aid worker around, distributing European food, and forcing local farmers out of their jobs. That’s just crazy!

SPIEGEL: The German government takes pride in precisely monitoring the recipients of its funds.

Shikwati: And what’s the result? A disaster. The German government threw money right at Rwanda’s president Paul Kagame. This is a man who has the deaths of a million people on his conscience — people that his army killed in the neighboring country of Congo.

SPIEGEL: What are the Germans supposed to do? Shikwati: If they really want to fight poverty, they should completely halt development aid and give Africa the opportunity to ensure its own survival. Currently, Africa is like a child that immediately cries for its babysitter when something goes wrong. Africa should stand on its own two feet.

Interview conducted by Thilo Thielke

Translated from the German by Patrick Kessler

Der Spiegel

Hvad er der galt? DDR-P1 forsvarer lige nu varmt kunstneres ytringsfrihed?

Nå der er forklaringen.

Unge venstreorienterede kritiserer til melodien af præsident Bush’s samplede stemme, der siger terror-terror-tterorist attack, USA’s regering, Bush, FBI osv. DR-medarbejderen holder selvfølgelig bare mikrofon.

Det drejer sig selvfølgelig om en stakkels venstreorienteret amerikansk kunstner – Steve Kurtz – der mener, at Bush er ved at indføre politistaten.

Winston Churchill i spændetrøje – hvor skøre kan man blive?

Filed under: Billeder/Pictures, Historie, Hodja, Kendte, Politik, Politisk korrekte, UK, WWII — Hodja @ 15:06

Man tror næsten det er 1. april:

A statue of Sir Winston Churchill in a straitjacket was unveiled yesterday despite opposition from the wartime leader’s family.

The life-size, glass-fibre statue went on display in Norwich as part of an exhibition staged by the charity Rethink to promote understanding of mental health problems.

John Leighton, its East Anglia manager, said: “We are trying to break down the stigma of mental illness.

“Churchill documented his depression and referred to it as his ‘black dog’. Nowadays it would be described as bi-polar disorder or manic depression.

“We all know that Churchill was a great leader and this statue is an illustration of what people with mental illness can achieve.”

A spokesman for the charity added: “We spoke to the Churchill estate a couple of years ago when the idea was first put forward but they did not approve. We decided to go ahead with it anyway because we thought it was a worthwhile thing to do.“By David Sapsted

Telegraph

churchilllowres_1.jpg

Bør FN nedlægges?

Filed under: FN, Guantanamo, Journalister, Pampere, Politik, Politisk korrekte — Hodja @ 13:59

Nu da Slubberdan Miloseviz er død i FN-fangenskab og han frygtede for sit liv og forgiftning, bør FN da nedlægges? Bør Amnesty Int. og Human Rights Watch forfølge FN?

Iøvrigt: dødsfald i fangenskab:

Guantanamo = 0

FN = 1

Konklusion?

FN vil gerne fordømme Danmark og beskytte muhammedanerne

Og det falder jo helt i tråd med deres tidligere meriter:

CRITICISM OF SUICIDE BOMBERS CENSORED AT THE UN

IHEU today (july 2005) attempted to call on the United Nations to condemn killing in the name of religion, but were prevented from doing so by the heavy-handed intervention of Islamic representatives. The IHEU call, at today’s meeting of the UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, follows moves by Islamic clerics to legitimise the current wave of terror attacks.

At this afternoon’s meeting, IHEU representative David Littman attempted to deliver a prepared text in the joint names of three international NGOs: the Association for World Education, the Association of World Citizens, and IHEU, but was prevented from doing so by the intervention of Islamic members of the Sub-Commission. After repeated interruptions he was unable to complete his speech.

The Islamic members of the Sub-Commission objected to the speech as an attack on Islam. The text however is a report on recent critical comment on Islamist extremism by a number of notable Muslim writers and is a call to the UN Human Rights Commission by the NGOs “to condemn calls to kill, to terrorise or to use violence in the name of God or any religion”.

The text referred to recent decisions by high-ranking Muslim clerics confirming that those who carry out suicide bombings cannot be treated as apostates and remain Muslims(1), a fatwa by a Saudi cleric that innocent Britons were a legitimate target for terrorist action(2), and remarks by Yusuf al-Qaradawi, dean of the College of Sharia and Islamic Studies at Qatar University who has visited Britain, that terror attacks are permissible.
Commenting on this censorship, Roy Brown, President of IHEU said:

“This is part and parcel of the refusal by the Islamic representatives at the UN to condemn the suicide bombers, or to accept any criticism of those who kill innocent people in the name of God. 

These actions follow the refusal of the Islamic states at the meeting of the Commission in April to condemn those who kill in the name of religion, and to categorise their attempts to criticise Islamic terrorists as “defamation of religion”.

“It is high time”, Mr Brown insisted “that the Islamic States at the UN recognised that the suicide bombers are acting in the name of their religion, and to unequivocally condemn their actions.”

Jihadwatch

Tonen hvad er det for en tone?

NYC Jails Imam Suspended for Saying ‘Terrorists’ Occupy White House

NEW YORK — The head Islamic chaplain for the New York City jail system was suspended yesterday after he claimed Muslims were being tortured in Manhattan lock-ups, and declared that the “greatest terrorists in the world occupy the White House.”

The action against Imam Umar Abdul-Jalil, the executive director of ministerial services for the Department of Correction, came in response to a story in yesterday’s Post. Mayor Bloomberg and City Correction Commissioner Martin Horn put Abdul-Jalil on paid administrative leave from his $76,602-a-year job, pending the outcome of an investigation into his remarks.

Outraged lawmakers demanded Abdul-Jalil be fired immediately, but Bloomberg said he is a civil service employee.

“We have to remove this cancer and make sure it is never allowed to spread again,” fumed Peter Vallone Jr. (D-Queens), who chairs the City Council’s Public Safety Committee.

Abdul-Jalil, 56, who is also imam of the Masjid Sabur mosque in Harlem, is one of the city’s most prominent Muslim leaders and has participated in a number of high-profile events with major city and state political figures – including emotional 9/11 memorial services at Ground Zero.

He has been at the Correction Department since 1993 and was appointed head chaplain overseeing 40 chaplains of all faiths in the spring of 2004.

Mere på FOXNEWS

Earlier this week, he initially denied the remarks. Later, he conceded he probably made them but his words were being “taken out of context.”

Hvor er det lige vi har hørt den før??

Åker du til Norge? Da må du passe på!! Norges nye Dhimmilov

Hvis en nordmand siger eller gør noget, der krænker eller ydmyger en muslim, skal han betragtes som skyldig, indtil han kan bevise sin uskyld. Og den krænkede afgør selv, om der foreligger en krænkelse.

Det er hovedindholdet af en ny lov, der markerer det norske folks overgang til dhimmi-status

Af Bruce Bawer
Den 19. april 2005, under minimal offentlig bevågenhed og stort set uden offentlig diskussion, vedtog det norske Storting en lov, der med ét slag alvorligt begrænser befolkningens ytringsfrihed.

 Diskriminationsloven, eller “Lov om forbud mod diskrimination på grund af etnicitet, religion mv.”, blev fremsat af daværende kommunalminister Erna Solberg (Høyre) og fik støtte fra hvert eneste parti i Stortinget, med undtagelse af det “populistiske” Fremskrittsparti.

Loven, der træder i kraft januar 2006, forbyder diskrimination og chikane (på norsk “trakassering”, red.) “på grund af etnicitet, national oprindelse, afstamning, hudfarve, sprog, religion og livssyn”. Chikane defineres i lovteksten som “handlinger, undladelser eller ytringer (forfatterens fremhævelse), som virker eller har til formål at virke krænkende, skræmmende, fjendtlige, nedværdigende eller ydmygende”.

Én ting er et forbud mod diskrimination på jobbet eller inden for boliglovgivningen, men at kriminalisere ytringer er noget ganske andet. Der er ikke noget mærkværdigt i, at forbuddet indføres på dette tidspunkt: Først for ganske nylig, efter en lang, politisk korrekt tavshed, er mislykket integration, kvindeundertrykkelse, omskæring, tvangsægteskaber, æresdrab og andre anliggender knyttet til landets muslimske miljøer – ikke mindst spørgsmålet om folks loyalitet over for den nation, de bor i – blevet offentlige samtaleemner.

Blandt mange minoritetsledere og -talsmænd er det upopulært at drøfte disse temaer, det betragtes som “krænkende” og “ydmygende”. Sammen med politikere, journalister og en række antidiskriminationsorganisationer ønsker de at bringe os tilbage til de gode gamle dage (for 2-3 år siden), da sådanne sager dårligt blev omtalt i medierne, og da man sagde, at det eneste problem, der var knyttet til sådanne miljøer, var nordmændenes racisme. Erna Solberg, som havde ansvaret for integration og andre indvandringsspørgsmål, greb som regel de tidligere nævnte udfordringer an på en ganske tandløs facon. Men i forsøget på at dæmpe en åben debat om de religiøse og kulturelle traditioner, der ligger til grund for problemerne, viste hun sig langtfra tandløs.

Tværtimod, hun fjernede det grundlæggende demokratiske koncept “uskyldig til det modsatte er bevist”. Under rubrikken “Bevisbyrde” står det i den nye lov, at “Hvis der foreligger omstændigheder, som giver grund til at tro, at der er sket brud på bestemmelserne … skal det lægges til grund, at et sådant brud har fundet sted, hvis ikke den, der er ansvarlig for handlingen, udeladelsen eller ytringen, sandsynliggør, at et sådant brud alligevel ikke har fundet sted“. Med andre ord ligger bevisbyrden hos den tiltalte: Man er skyldig, til det modsatte er bevist.

Det bliver værre endnu. Klager i henhold til loven kan fremsættes ikke bare af den angiveligt forurettede part, men også af antidiskriminationsorganisationer som Anti-racistisk Center og Center mod Etnisk Diskrimination (som medvirkede ved lovens udarbejdelse) og af diskriminationsombudsmanden (hvis beføjelser er nedfældet i en anden ny statut, diskriminationsombudsloven). Disse organer står dermed klar til at bistå dem, der føler sig krænkede, med at forfølge de krænkende parter.

Bliver man fundet skyldig i en sådan krænkelse, kan man blive dømt til at betale erstatning; har man begået forbrydelsen “sammen med mindst to andre personer” (f. eks. en skribent, der sammensværger sig med en redaktør og en forlægger?), kan det medføre, at man straffes “med bøde eller fængsel i op til tre år”. Kort sagt er loven, som siges at skulle forebygge chikane, faktisk en opskrift på chikane — nemlig af nordmænd, der tør sige ubehagelige sandheder.

I en ny bog, Eurabia, skriver Bat Ye`or om “dhimmier” – de ikke-muslimer som boede i lande erobret af muslimer, og som blev tolereret, hvis de underordnede sig profetens tilhængere, afholdt sig fra at kritisere deres sejrherrer og accepterede systematisk undertrykkelse og konstant ydmygelse. Bat Ye`or bemærker, at politikere i Europa stort set har påtaget sig dhimmiens rolle i forhold til deres nye landsmænd: De ser bort fra indvandrermiljøernes manglende menneskerettigheder og intolerante retorik, mens de fordømmer og isolerer de europæere, som åbent og ærligt prøver at diskutere problemerne.

I diskriminationsloven har Stortinget slet og ret lovfæstet nordmændenes dhimmi-status og givet bemyndigelse til et netværk af organer, der skal straffe uønskede ytringer.

Findes der diskriminerende handlinger og ytringer i Norge i dag? Javist. I mange hjem i det østlige Oslo bliver kvinder og piger brutalt undertrykt, gennembanket og voldtaget af mænd, der mener det er deres hellige ret og forpligtelse at gøre netop det. I moskéer spreder imamer groteske løgne og vrøvl om kristne, jøder, europæere og homoseksuelle. Men det er netop den slags handlinger og ytringer som er beskyttede af diskriminationsloven: “Loven gælder på alle samfundsområder med undtagelse af familieliv og personlige forhold. Forbuddet mod diskrimination på grund af religion og livssyn … gælder ikke for handlinger og aktiviteter, der foregår inden for rammerne af tros- og livssynssammenslutninger samt virksomheder med et religiøst eller livssynsmæssigt formål, hvis handlingerne eller aktiviteterne er af betydning for at gennemføre sammenslutningens eller virksomhedens religiøse eller livssynsmæssige formål.” Der er dermed tilladt, at en imam prædiker, at nordmænd er svin, men en nordmand, der svarer igen, risikerer fængsel. Ligeledes kan muslimske kvinder og piger leve som fanger i eget hjem, mens en nordmand, der prøver at rette søgelyset mod problematikken, risikerer at blive fundet skyldig i henhold til loven.

I Norge bliver vigtige lovforslag sædvanligvis debatteret indtil kedsommelighed i medierne, før loven ændres. Ikke diskriminationsloven. Politikere og journalister undgik at tale om forslaget, da det blev fremsat, og efterfølgende blev vedtagelsen knap omtalt.

Almindelige nordmænd ved ingenting om loven. De har gentagne gange fået at vide af deres medier, at George W. Bush har slået ned på afvigende meninger i Amerika. Meget få af dem ved, at det ikke er Bush-regeringen, men deres eget Storting, der har taget et væsentligt skridt i den retning. Erna Solberg og co. forestillede sig utvivlsomt, at vedtagelsen af diskriminationsloven ville blødgøre muslimske ledere, talsmænd og ekstremister. De tager fejl. Tværtimod vil loven opmuntre dem til at insistere endnu mere aggressivt på deres ret til at opretholde barbariske skikke og fordomme i Norge. Samtidig vil loven styrke deres beslutsomhed med hensyn til at rense det norske samfund for anskuelser eller ord, der ikke er i overensstemmelse med deres troslære.

Det er sørgeligt og skammeligt, at Norges nationale forsamling har prøvet at pacificere grupper med dybt udemokratiske traditioner ved at begrænse nordmænds mest grundlæggende demokratiske ret. Hvorfor forstår politikerne ikke, hvor meget de ofrer i dette vildledte og forgæves forsøg på at sikre social harmoni? Sappho

La Kimpolina spørger i et af sine indlæg om hvordan den norske avis VG kan skrive som de gør?

Jeg har en lille del af svaret til Kimpolina:

“In Norway, at least, one reason for for the lack of political diversity among journalists is that most of them are graduates of the journalism college at Volda, where the faculty consists largely of former members of the Maoist, pro-Khmer Rouge AKP (Workers Communist Party). Norways only professor of journalism at the university level, Sigurd Allern of the University of Oslo, was himself once the head of the AKP.”

Kilde: While Europe Slept; Bruce Bawer: s 48.

Bogen forklarer iøvrigt en hel del om Norge, idet forfatteren, der er amerikaner, har boet der i flere år.

James Madison – en af den amerikanske forfatnings fædre – om ytringsfriheden

Filed under: Citater, Islam — Hodja @ 01:11

“Et vist misbrug er uadskillelig fra den rigtige brug af alting. Og i intet tilfælde er det mere rigtigt end, når det gælder pressen.”

Men at gå ud over den og måske overskride den kræver mod og integritet. Journalister har sjældent dette mod, for de tør ikke udsætte sig for at være politisk ukorrekte.

Hans Magnus Enzensberger om det multikulturelle samfund (1992)

Filed under: Citater, Islam — Hodja @ 00:55

“Det multikulturelle samfund er og bliver et et konfust slagord, så længe man tabuiserer de vanskeligheder, dette begreb fører med sig, istedet for at afklare dem.”

Han henviste til Sovjetunionen, hvor man i årtier og med uhyre ressourcer forsøgte at tærske følelser af sammenhold og fælles mål ind i et multikulturelt samfund.

Kommentar: Tjetjenien, Kirgisistan, Kazhakstan, Ukraine, Hviderusland osv osv.

Viggo Hørups grundlovstale 1884

Viggo Hørup talte mod den herskende politiske klasse i 1884 – de priviligerede. De priviligerede, som ikke er opstillet af folket, for det er ikke folket, der opstiller folketingskandidater.

De priviligerede siger som solkongen Ludvig d. 14. "Staten – det er mig"

Nå men Viggo udtalte:

"Man kan håne den offentlige mening, foragte den og træde den under fødder, men den offentlige mening sejrer til sidst. Den breder sig i videre og videre ringe, den bryder stærkere og stærkere på, og den bryder altid igennem. Den, der slår til landets offentlige mening, han slår til hundrede sider på en gang, og fra hundrede sider på en gang giver vi ham slaget tilbage, indtil folkets vilje atter er blevet landets lov."

Mere fremgang til Dansk Folkeparti

Mindre end fem procentpoint skiller nu Socialdemokraterne og Dansk Folkeparti, viser ny meningsmåling
Ekstra mandater til Dansk Folkeparti og ny nedtur til Socialdemokraterne. 

Vilstrups nyeste meningsmåling fastslår endnu en gang de politiske vindere og tabere på Muhammedkrisen, skriver Politiken Søndag.

I målingen når DF op på 17,4 procent, mens Socialdemokraterne går tilbage til 22 procent.

Selvom Venstre også må notere tilbagegang udbygger den borgerlige blok sit forspring i forhold til oppositionen i kraft af Dansk Folkepartis massive fremgang og De konservatives stabile niveau.

Socialdemokraterne ser afklapsningen som konsekvens af den midterkurs, partiet har valgt i Muhammedsagen, siger næstformand i folketingsgruppen Henrik Sass Larsen.