Today we learned that our department of justice decided to celebrate the anniversary of the Operation Weserübung by teaching our population that we are no longer masters in our own house. This time it is an author and humanitarian named Niels Holck, they want to extradite to India.
Some might ask why they want to scare our population a second time when they failed to completely in the Camilla Broe case.
First several newspapers have written how the extradition case was a part of a deal which should secure that COP15 should be held in Copenhagen. We got our meeting but most people would state that India did not keep their end of the bargain. They teamed up with some countries from the third world and the meeting was more about extortion of money from the developed world than the climate.
More important India can solve a problem for us. Denmark have a large merchant fleet. New ships are added and old ones are phased out. India has a huge knowhow in the ship breaking business. Such a task should be dealt with by experts as it could end up in an environmental catastrophe. Second based on hard learned lessons in the Madhya Pradesh region they are also experts in the chemical and polymer business.
So without allowing this extradtion procedure, Denmark could face the risk of housing industry which could be more productive in India. We are members of the World Trade Organization. We work with this organization to liberalize international trade. Our ships should go down there once they are finished as cargo ships or ferries as it has already happened in a lot of cases.
We can loose jobs, we can get more pollution in our country. The case has to go on.
But is he a terrorist?
Some might believe so. The question about if he is a terrorist or a freedom fighter cannot be answered in our lifetime. We are some Danes who are well-educated in our history. A former prime minister Wilhelm Buhl criticized the resistance movement in 1943 and represenatives for the predecessor to the present European Union characterized the Danish freedom fighters as terrorists. Of course once the war was over, Wilhelm Buhl was reelected as prime minister and the criticism was forgotten. Today none would call the Danish freedom fighters for terrorists. It is the winner who write history, not the loser.
When we are talking war crimes the winner also decide what act is a crime and what act which is not. Using airplanes to remove entire cities like both sides did during world wide 2 was only condemned as war crimes for the loosing party.
In newer conflicts the Serbia leaders during the civil war was war criminals and people like Franjo Tuđman were heros.
Personally I believe that Mr. Holck as he calls himself right now should have refrained from any concern for people outside Denmark.
I have chosen to do so. I do not want to risk an arrest for trading a T-shirt where the profit ends up at a terrorist organization. I didn’t support the victims of the earthquake in Haiti. They have already thanked the world by arresting U.S. rescue workers and in fact they have recently asked that the world discontinue some of the help.
The minister responsible for handing aid out to the third world has resently stated that a huge part of our aid will go to bribes. It can simply not be prevented and we should accept it as part of the game.
I don’t mind if he is guilty but what did the department of justice learn from the Camilla Broe case?
It is another extradition agreement they use for this case. They have learned something.
- First he has to be returned to Denmark only 3 weeks after they have made a decision in the show trial in India. Had Camilla Broe been convicted she could have waited for 6 months.
- Second the death penalty is out of the picture. It is some disappointment in a country where they love necktie parties.
- Third Denmark demand a certain standard of the prison they put him in. It was also a lesson learned from Florida where everybody could see that Broe had lost 15-20 pounds during her time in Florida because she had to settle with the food visitors bought for her.
Still they have to let the Danish courts decide if his actions were a crime based on the criminal laws of 1995. If he had done a similar act today it would be the case, but back in 1995 it was only a crime to attack Danish interests abroad. This was changed in 2002 but should a law of today apply even if the act was not a crime when it occured?
I will be following this case. Once again I can say to my children that the ordeal and torment for the people living abroad should be of no concern for them. I believe that there is a lot to learn as the case progresses. Especially for future generations.