However, when I got to the security line, I started to get the feeling something was different here. Big posters sporting full-body scanners were put up, saying something to the effect that at this particular airport, enhanced security measures were in effect.

Being slightly concerned about the radiation effect of said full-body scanners, I thought to myself that I can always opt out, as is possible in the states, believing this to be an option in the UK too. Sure, an enhanced search is not altogether pleasant, but better than receiving an unnecessary dose of radiation.

However, while I was in the queue – a long queue – I looked up some info on my phone. It turns out that if you refuse a full-body scan in a UK airport, travel will be declined. And that, while the airport maintains that the scanners are completely safe (stating that the amount of radiation received is equivalent to that of 5 minutes of background radiation), highly competent researchers have posed serious questions with regards to the potentially cancer-inducing effects of these scans.

As I walked through the queue, I considered my options, should I be selected for a body-scan. Having some time to reflect, I came to the conclusion I had none. If I resisted the body-scan, I would not be allowed to travel. £100 out the window, and no way to get back to Denmark. If I went through the scanner, potential long-term health-effects. I looked with envy on the business-class travellers, and the aforementioned couple with the kids and the pram, who somehow got onto the fast-track security line, which, besides providing a vastly more expeditious security process, was completely devoid of these scanners.

I was not selected for the body-scan. Unlike many of my fellow travellers. The worst thing about the experience was that I did not have a choice. Had I been been selected, I would have been compelled to go through with the scan.

On reflection, this is probably the first time government agencies have resorted to imposing potentially health-damaging security checks on its population, let alone the vastly upgraded privacy intrusions. Sure, the liquid restrictions were annoying, but they did not impose any harm on me, other than having to throw out the occasional face-wash that I forgot to take out of the hand luggage Nor are the metal-detectors or the x-ray machines harmful to us in any way. Enter the body-scanners. Radiation-exposure is now mandatory in order to fly.

The reality is that there is some debate on the health effects of the scanners. In addition to the mentioned expert comments, there is a recent case of scanners in the US having emitted much higher radiation than they should, or at the very least being measured incorrectly. And there are the comments of scientists in this wired article, not exactly inspiring calm. As the icing on the cake, Bruce Schneier, a well-renowned security expert and cryptographer, makes some interesting comments on the effectiveness of these new security measures (though he admittedly elsewhere believes them to be safe health-wise).

Bottom-line, I am sceptical towards new technology that is being rushed in, proclaimed safe, and put to mass-use in the name of security. Mass x-ray scans of vast amounts of people is certainly not something to be undertaken lightly.

The party secretary of DF notes: ‘we don’t want anyone who professes extreme viewpoints’.

Not going into the oxymoronic nature of this statement in itself (as many would probably feel that the essence of DF is just that), it is very interesting that DF does not recognize the obvious fact that extreme viewpoints such as these are exactly what is created and even encouraged by their very rhetorics and general way of communicating to the public.

As Cypher says in the Matrix: ‘Ignorance is bliss’…

It’s incredible how Dansk Folkeparti can keep maintaining they are a legitimate political party with no underlying prejudice agenda, when time after time their members seem to be showing a different attitude. Only to be corrected by the party leadership, most often Thulesen Dahl, whereafter they incredibly revert to having very politically correct opinions.

To me, it’s incredible that a somewhat large minority of the Danish population is still behind this party. This stuff seems to happen a lot, and it should say something about the underlying agenda. But then again, it is sometimes easier to line up behind fear-based propaganda than making more nuanced – and harder – choices.

Hans Kristian Skibby, running for city council in my home town, ‘admits that an arrangement around swine flesh could create problems for a lot of Muslims and Jews who don’t eat swine, but he does not think this is something that should be taken into account. “I know it can be a problem some places, since a lot of people do not feel like eating swine, but that should not stop us from meaning that this should be the case in Denmark”‘

He proceeds to stating ‘Especially healthy or unhealthy? I am no dietitian, but in Denmark, there is a tradition through many generations, that in this country we can eat pork roast and frikadeller [traditional Danish dish]‘.

Not that I am surprised. Dansk Folkeparti is just banging on their old drum: An underlying agenda of harassing anyone who is different, especially Muslims, until they get enough and leave the country.

But, Hans Kristian Skibby, just so you can take this into account: I am by any standard Danish. I come from several generations of Danish ancestors – not that this should matter, but I have a suspicion that to Dansk Folkeparti it would – and I do not eat swine. In fact, I do not believe it’s good for you, and I choose to not eat it. And no matter what you might think of the Danish’ness around this, I would hate to end up in an old people’s home at one point where I would have to eat swine just because someone like yourself do not think this is ‘Danish’ enough.

Denmark and being Danish should be about more than eating ‘flæskesteg’ and ‘frikadeller’ – good as it may be. It should be about respect for freedom of thought – ‘det danske frisind’ – also towards those that think differently than us. But then again, Dansk Folkeparti has never really wanted this. They want only to cling to a shallow, narrow definition of what is Danish, thereby hollowing out any essence of its true ideals.

Source: http://politiken.dk/politik/article833614.ece

What you may need to know if you’re not from around here is that traditionally, churches in Denmark have been a refuge, as safe-place, for people such as these who have exhausted all other options, and it has traditionally been unthinkable to send police into a church to exercise force there.

In addition, large groups of people (see for instance kirkeasyl.dk) have gone into this case offering their voice and protest against the decision to send these people back to Iraq, on humanitarian grounds. And as politiken.dk’s editor in chief, Thøger Seidenfaden remarks, this would have been entirely possible within the laws of the land.

Nevertheless, Wednesday night, police broke into the church and arrested the Iraqis with the intent of sending them back to their home country.

I’m actually not sure on where I stand on the matter of these refugees. On the one hand, should I decide, they would be allowed to stay in Denmark, but on the other hand, we have a judicial system in Denmark that are supposed to deal with matters of the law. And when it so happens that the deciding sections of the government have deemed that according to Danish law these people should be sent home, it is problematic if precisely they are allowed to stay just because a lot of people have gotten emotionally involved. In Denmark, we have – mostly – a working legal system, where if you want to change the laws of the land, you do that by exercising your democratic voting rights, and influencing your elected representatives in ‘folketinget‘ (the legislative body of the Danish government). I can be just as sad as most left-wing activists of the rhetoric used against foreigners in our country and the laws laid down to ‘shield us from the bad [insert whatever here’, but Denmark still remains a democracy, where, unfortunately – or perhaps fortunately – we need to respect the majority opinion, even if it sucks (in our view). Well, unless we are so much moved that we feel an obligation to enter into civil disobedience.

Which on this night, a lot of Danish citizens felt called to do. I am not to judge if this was right or not. However, what upsets me the most (and I know the kirkeasyl.dk folks would probably disagree with me on this one, seeing as they are all in this for the refugees), is the way the police appear to have handled the situation against people peacefully protesting against the police carrying out this order. True, they were blocking the way of the police, but have a look for yourself on some of the shots taken by politiken.dk this night: video.

This reminded me of the conduct of the Italian police once I were in Rome when they were taking on huge groups of activists who appeared to be up to nothing else than thrash the neighbourhood while setting fire on containers and running around with home-made axes, shields, and all other sorts things.

However, this is not a case of such revolt. This was a case of people moved by their conscience to sit themselves peacefully down on the road so that the police could not take these refugees away.

When I saw this video it made me angry. The conduct of the police as displayed in these takes are simply unacceptable. You do not use the baton against people already lying on the ground having been beaten down. You do not strike more times than absolutely necessary to split the crowd; anything else than that is clear excessive force. You do not strike people in their back as they are running away. You do not slap people in the face with your fist simply because they bad-mouth you. Fair enough that the police needed to use appropriate force to remove the people blocking their way. But the impression this gives of the police is not appropriate, it is excessive. And this is a fundamental problem, for if the executive branch of power does not take every measure to ensure that it acts appropriately when exercising force, trust in the democratic system will break down. Especially the last sequence on the video where a young woman receives 8 blows with the baton some of them while she is getting up and running from the beatings are upsetting. For once, I agree with Anders Samuelsen in seeing this as ‘sickening’ and something that should not take place in a properly functioning democracy.

And what is more, the conduct of the police in this case appears to be simply an extension of the overtones from the Danish government when addressing the issue of refugees and immigrants. As remarked before, it could have been well within the law to let these people stay. But there appears to be an immense pressure from the government to all its branches to take the strictest possible interpretation and apply it. One may wonder if legislative branch of the government has not gotten too busy sending other signals as well, than simply laying down the law. Or rather, if the legislative branch has ever been purely legislative.