Information of Denmark
'The temporal
apostles of the repressive tolerance', taught by the totalitarians of temper in
Germany, France and USA, made their entry.
Let us begin
backwards:
The criminality and
police resources in Denmark with 5.2 mill. inhabitants in 1991 (4.6 mill in
1960), of which 1/3 lived in towns with more than 10,000 inhabitants.
The official
accounts can not be meaningfully continued (after 1991), because trustworthy
descriptions of the criminality divided in nationality have been lost in
Denmark.
The number of
notified violations of criminal law has more then doubled from 1960 to 1990,
and in the period 1980-1990 they increased by 35 p.c. to 550,000 notified
violations in average a year.
Earlier about 30
p.c. of such violations were solved, in 1991 about one out of five (20 p.c.)
ended with a solution. In 1960 the Police and Prosecution had 7,375 employees,
in 1991 the number was 14,500, including 10,200 policemen. It is extremely
uneffictient if ressources do not lack. From 1996 they really do with help from
the Conservative Party too.
The long arm of the
law :
In 1962 they had a
policeman on the Police Station in Svendborg. The youngsters called him 'Lemmy'
- a figure from an English very popular detective film. They connected that
police- officer a little with figure from the film.
There was some
points of resemblance. Eric could confirm that, when he had to admit that he
has smashed some windows in the Railway Station of Svendborg in order to make
an impression on some young girls.
Today they flee
from their country, nearly as fast as the immigration from Islamic countries to
new Danish citizenships.
'Lemmy' did not let
the young first-time-violators run. He caught them, and took them to a not very
nice night in the detention. The only thing the youngster did not like by
'Lemmy' was that he always was present, when wrong things happened. Otherwise
they liked him. Eric found out that it costs to make troubles, and he should
not go farther on the road of the offenses and the crimi- nal actions.
The development in
the more dangerous criminality:
Intentional
violence and bodily harm occurred in number of a few hundreds in 1960, from
1991 6,400 a year were suspected. About every half year the number of such
cases increases with 50 p.c. Cases of narcotics were nearly unknown in 1960, in
1991 more than 1,700 cases were tried by police of criminality and by the
Prosecution in one year.
The most cases of
criminality is about larceny, larceny for the purpose of limited use and housebreaking
(totally 430,000). The number of larcenies and house-breaking have increased
nearly five times in the period 1960-1990.
The number of
robberies increased in the period from about 300 a year to nearly 10 times 300.
Alone in the 1980s the number of robberies more than doubled.
Cases about
fortune, money including taxes blocks for cases about assaults, narcotics,
bodily harm, larceny and housebreaking. 112,000 cases of violation of the
criminal law in 1989, there were 538,300 notified violations, 1,918
prosecution-withdrawns and 21,659 cases where prosecution was left undone.
The official
explanation to criminality:
About the reasons
for and the effects of the way things have been developing as described here,
the elite of power, criminolo- gists, pedagogues, journalists, sociologists,
psychologists, evaluators and other can tell a great deal, and they have the
possibility to do this, when they want to.
It is always
something 'about a investigation that shows..', the one more effected or
unscientific and design than the other
In the Danish
newspaper Politiken 23rd July 1989 you could read a reporting from Institute of
Criminology. Interior migration from rural to urban districts, differences in
the economies of people, and an asserted increased willingness to report
criminal acts are stated as reasons to the explosive development in the
accounted criminality. In the beginning of the 1980s it was the unemployment
that should be guilty, in 1989 the unemployment effects in contrary is so
disci- plining on so many young people that they instead concentrate themselves
to live healthy and rationally, you could read in the same feature article in
Politiken. In 1990 you begin to read in the newspapers, and see on TV that
large proportions of the violations of the criminal law are not reported stated
caused by reprisals from the criminal, who nearly every time is led free after
ended examination.
Yes, you have to
hear and see a lot before you loose your senses, especially your sense of
humor.
In 1960 people talked
to each other in the buses, and carrier cyclists whistled the tune of the day,
when they hurried through Copenhagen. From 1975 it was the practice in
school-classes that the children shouted and screamed, while the teacher tried
to find something they felt like listen to. From 1980 kindergartens rushed up
into the buses, and overturned old people. In 1988 less than 200
street-mischiefmakers could terrorize whole quarters of Copenhagen, while a
frightened crowd of policemen just looked at what was happening, afraid of
being the persecuted in the media that represents Upper-denmark least by good
most by evil.
In 1991 the forces
of 'the Possesseds' and of 600 vicars were united to neglect the law and the
rights in Denmark. A church-occupation in Copenhagen. From that church they
made via the media a new Special-Law via the media for some of their
friends from the Middle East. Our parliament had to accept, perhaps because
they are servants, not real rulers.
Who have the real
power? The Government or International Red Cross. Or perhaps we have to go
higher.
Many despaired
individuals asked like this, when I traveled around and told facts in the
period 1990-1992.
In 1996
350,000-500,000 immigrants (7-10 p.c.) had settled in Denmark. They are called
refugees, even though they have paid 3 year's wage to come here on false
papers. They occupy 30 p.c. of the worst cells in the prisons, and they are
prosecuted 4-7 times more than the Danes, when you look at the gross and most
infamous criminal acts following the official Danish statistics.
In the description
of the criminality it is important to give the possibility of comparison in
relation to the foundation of the population, and to their charges for each
head category of criminal acts divided between Danish and foreigners.
Without such
possibilities (from 1992) the accounts have no meaning anymore.
An example of the
consequences of the false arrangement:
With the official
foundation of population the analysis of the Commissioner of Police in the
years 1993 and 1994 lead among many other things to the following conclusion:
4.5 p.c. of
shop-larcenies in Denmark were done by Danish citizens. 11.4 p.c. were done by
foreign citizens, 84.1 p.c. of the larcenies were done by asylum-applicants. Notice
that last percent. Notice that it is 84.1 p.c. of all shop- larcenies in the
country, if the charges have been made. Here I trust the Commissioner of the
police. This criminality is the consequence of the official information, and
this criminality have be made by 10.3 p.c. of all the asylum- applicants, as
they are called in the analysis. An in addition the 84.1 p.c. of all
shop-larce- nies were only 65.2 p.c. of all the violations of these asylum-applicants.
This is simply
false. It is a wild exaggeration to maintain that asylum-applicants are 18-19
times more criminal than the Danish citizens by this criminal act. But this is
the consequence of the official information.
General it is
difficult with lies. If there officially should be very few asylum-applicants
in the country, and charges have been made against them, then they have to be
very criminal. If there on the other hand are more asylum-applicants, then the
registered criminality are divided on this larger number, and then they are not
so criminal.
[As a racist you
would not have focused on these aspect, I guess. The state did not.]
This critical
analysis, of which a single element was brought to light here, was mailed to
the Folketinget (our parliament). There were no useful reactions.
Now the reader
perhaps understand, why the accounts of the criminality were not published for
three years until 1993.
In the beginning of
my analysis including explanations and comments I asked the authorities some
questions. These questions are listed in the following. The answers I received
were not useful, not as information but they were very fine documentation. Bureaucratic
flight from the responsibility. I told the public this, and I tell it here too.
The answers of the authorities have not been translated to English. The
original answer in Danish has just been copied according to its worth
Questions to the
responsible authorities about the results of the present reading: [the investigation of criminality 1993 and 1994 made
by the Commissioner of Police]
1. In the period
1980-1994 58,048 have received the Danish citizenship by naturalizations. 72
p.c. or 41,783 concern immigrants from outside Western Europe and North
America.
Will the account of
criminality on this foundation be arranged in such a way that it can be seen,
if the charges concern naturalized?
2. Question 1
actualizes even more of the fact that young women which are children of natura-
lized, in these years begin to bear children which in spite of their language,
culture, and of the father officially can be indicated as Danish.
3. The number of
'asylum-seekers' is included in the investigation of the Commissioner of Police
for the years 1993 and 1994. The number in this category is indicated for the
two years to respectively about 21,000 and 20,442.
It has been shown
in this analysis that these figures can not include all refugees including
those in integration-programs in 1993 and 1994.
When there do not
exist official accounts of refugees referring to fixed dates of the year, I
want to be informed a little more precisely on which basis the number of
refugees as a part of the population in the statistic analysis has been
selected? When the accounts of the number in the analysis automatically lead to
an systematic overestimated criminality of the refugees, do the authorities
then plan to correct the accounting-fault so that the account of the population
of Denmark will be in good order hence-forward?
4. Will an
initiative be taken to make one description for each category or head-category
of criminal acts - and not for a total number of different actions for a part
of the population?
5. When the
official period 'News from Criminal Care' in the numbers 5,6 and 7 1994
informed that the proportion of the imprisoned foreigners in Danish prisons in
these years was 10-12 p.c., and interior sources in the prison administration
informed that the proportion in those of the prisons where the strongest
punished are imprisoned, was 28-32 p.c., does this large divergence attribute
to a large diviation in the proportions in the single institutions? Or must
this divergence also be seen as a fault in accounting. The 28-32 p.c. matches
precisely our estimated frequencies in the more strong criminality among
foreigners?
6. If the
investigation of the criminality caused by faults in population-basis and/or in
the individual-category-choice does not fulfill the scientific claims about
adequance and unequivocability, will it be corrected then so that it shows a
correct picture of the criminality in Denmark including the proportions of
foreigners and of Danes in their country?
The Minister of
Justice, The Minister of Interior Affairs, their predecessors, and some of
their civil servants in the Directory of Foreigners and the Department of
Interior Affairs incur a serious responsibility for their misinformation by
distorted descriptions of the criminality in Denmark for example in the years
1993 and 1994.