jan top christensen

Lykønskning til nyvalgt

Efter at Danmark i årtier fra officielt hold har hylet med i koret af “menneskerettigheds aktivister” kommer der mere og mere hold i den formodning, at man i vesten er så meget på hælene at man har fået andet at tænke på. Senest lykønsker og roser den danske ambassadør i Manila, Jan Top Christens, den nyvalgte filippinske præsident Rody Duterte på FB. Det gør han naturligvis ikke uden dækning i København. Og ikke et ord om “menneskerettigheder”, selvom Duterte gennem to årtier har været under angreb for netop menneskerettighedskrækelser, ved beskyldninger om, at han skulle have sendt “dødspatruljer” på gaden i Davao, hvor han op til nu har været borgmester. I ambassadørens FB post hedder det d. 31. maj bl.a.:

Promising that the new government would engage with CPP and the Moros in a serious way. Peace and security could bring growth and development to Mindanao and other strife-ridden regions.
Many experienced and qualified persons lined up for the secretary jobs of the Departments. Some observed that conflicts of intererest should be avoided.
If all goes well, the Philippines could be heading for even higher growth rates than the average 6,2% seen over the recent years. More jobs would be the result and quickly reducing the number of all too many people still living in poverty. We wish Duterte, president-elect, good luck and are looking forward to engage with the new Government when in place to the benefit of the peoples of the Philippines and Denmark.

En dansker der ikke så noget at glæde sig over ved udsigten til en præsident Duterte var socialdemokraternes “International Programme Manager” og fomand for NGOen IBIS, Mette Müller Kristensen, der på socialdemokraternes Instagram skrev:

…”Om tre uger stiller Paeng op til parlamentsvalget i Filippinerne. Samme dag skal der også vælges ny præsident. Præsidentvalget ser ud til at blive lidt for spændende denne gang ? For lige nu fører Duterte præsidentvalgkampen i meningsmålingerne. Han er kendt som “The Punisher” – borgmesteren fra Davao, som ikke er bange for at bryde menneskerettighederne, og gerne anerkender, at han har diktatoriske tilbøjeligheder. Og når vi nu taler om diktatorer, så fører Bongbong Marcos i kampen om at blive vicepræsident. Han er søn af Fillippinernes tidligere diktator, Ferdinand Marcos. Bongbong tager ikke afsted fra sin fars metoder og mange filippinere frygter, at Marcos-familien igen er på vej ind i præsident-paladset ?
Heldigvis er der også gode demokratiske kræfter, som stiller op – heriblandt Paeng ?

Om tre uger stiller Paeng op til parlamentsvalget i Filippinerne. Samme dag skal der også vælges ny præsident. Præsidentvalget ser ud til at blive lidt for spændende denne gang ? For lige nu fører Duterte præsidentvalgkampen i meningsmålingerne. Han er kendt som “The Punisher” – borgmesteren fra Davao, som ikke er bange for at bryde menneskerettighederne, og gerne anerkender, at han har diktatoriske tilbøjeligheder. Og når vi nu taler om diktatorer, så fører Bongbong Marcos i kampen om at blive vicepræsident. Han er søn af Fillippinernes tidligere diktator, Ferdinand Marcos. Bongbong tager ikke afsted fra sin fars metoder og mange filippinere frygter, at Marcos-familien igen er på vej ind i præsident-paladset ?
Heldigvis er der også gode demokratiske kræfter, som stiller op – heriblandt Paeng ?…”

Mette Müller kunne passende komme med nogle beviser for et eller andet kriminelt fra Duterte hånd. Mht “diktatoriske tilbøjeligheder” så er citatet pr. hukommelse: Loven er et diktat. Som præsident er jeg øverste ansvarlig for retshåndhævelsen, i den forstand er jeg diktator.

EB.dk skriver den tidligere redaktør for skriftet, Bent Falbert om menneskerettigheder under overskriften: “Når menneskerettigheder bliver forbryderrettigheder” bl.a.:

’Jamen, det strider imod menneskerettighederne’.

Dén forargede sætning har i årtier – men især i de seneste år – blokeret enhver indsats imod ikke så få urimeligheder. For rettighederne betragtes nærmest som gudgivne.

FNs menneskerettighedserklæring og især den juridisk bindende europæiske menneskerettighedskonvention er tænkt som det hæderlige individs beskyttelse mod statsovergreb.

Men i stigende omfang bliver rettighederne misbrugt af forbrydere som skjold mod straf og udvisning. Kombineret med alles krav på sociale ydelser opstår groteske situationer, hvor skatteyderne må finde sig i at finansiere, at gangstere lever på et mere luksuriøst niveau end mange ærlige mennesker.

Tilpas reglerne

Sådan går det til, at menneskerettigheder bliver forbryderrettigheder. Hensynet til gangstere overstiger hensynet til alle andre.

Derfor forstår jeg glimrende de voksende krav om, at konventionerne skal opsiges og genforhandles, så de tilpasses vor tid. Der må sættes grænser for, hvor mange Barci- og Levakovic-familier vi skal lade os terrorisere af.

På vej til

Rody Duterte, filippinernes nyvalgte præsident, er som læsere af bloggen vil vide, kendt for et kontant og frit sprog, ofte syd for livremmen. Hvad vi også fik gjort opmærksom på, så er det ikke et spørgsmål intellektuel kapacitet, men om retorisk stil. Et par Youtube videoer siger det hele.

160518 bronson vs muggers

Et cap fra Bronson filmen “Death Wish” er nærmest omvendt Duterte. I et af klippene i den første video [9:25] nedenfor svare Duterte på spørgsmålet, om han har organiseret “dødspatruljer”:

Det behøver jeg ikke, det er et job for enhver politimand eller enhver borger, at foretage arrestationen.

 

 

 

Radio 24/7 havde da valgresultatet var sikkert et par indslag med dels en dansk gift filipina opvokset i Davao mens Duterte var borgmester, dels ambasadør Jan Top. Lad ligge at værten kalder Duterte for “spradebasse“, det kan man selv bedømme udfra videoerne. Her og her.

 

Filippinsk valg hos DDR

DDR har også dækket det filippinske valg. Der indledes med en kort gennemgang af fillipinernes historie siden cirka år 1000 hængt op på nogle centrale begivenheder. En ganske fornuftig disposition. Og så går det ellers, som man kan forvente, galt så såre man kommer til “islam”. Islam kom ikke til “de” filipiske øer omkring år år 1.400. For det første var der ikke noget, der bare minder om en samlet statsdannelse, for det andet var det i 1.300 årene. Hvilket er så velkendt og velbelyst, at det ikke er mellem 1350 og 1450.

For det andet er der tale om, at disse malayiske sultanater på et langt senere tids punkt, efter påtvungen aftale, men dog aftaler der anerkender disse folks som folk, bliver lagt ind under Den Spanske Krones administration af de filippinske øer. Det er der især to grunde til: Man ville undgå briter og hollændere i baghaven og man var nød til at gøre et eller andet ved muhammedanernes default muhammedanske opførsel. Man skal helt frem til midten af 1800 årene før der kommer nogenlunde styr på den sag. Og det var så ikke i form af statslig indgriben, men en Spansk præst (vi vender til bage til den historie på et tidspunkt), der anlagde et kystforsvar strækkende fra  Dumaguete City på øen Negros i syd og nord på mod Cebu City.

Udkigstårn der indgik i kystforsvaret i Oslob:

Baluarte (watchtower)

Lidt hurtigt om vagt/udkigtårne og filippinske frimærker her.

Forsvaret bestod af en række tårne som man kunne signalere imellem og tilhørende småbåde, der sejlede ud og sænkede de både/skibe som de indtrægende muhammedanere ankom i. Så Mikkel Müller, for ikke at rode den pågående krig med islam ind i en historie som ikke handler om denne, skulle have sagt noget retning af:

“Islam blev reprænsenteret i det nuværende filippinerne ved, at sultanater på Sulu øerne og det sydvestlige Mindanao blev lagt ind under den spanske administration”.

Når man nævner Magellan i den her forbindelse, så nævner man usagt også kristendommens ankomst og udbredels. Gør man det, må man også nævne at kristendom også ankom og blev udbredt af japanere så tidligt som 1614.

I øvrigt blev der ikke kolonialiseret noget som helst i forbindelse med Magellans besøg (og død), det var senere, om ordet kolonialiseret er det rigtige er diskutabelt, men det er rigtigt grundlaget blev lagt ved den lejlighed, men resten er en ret omstændig histori der strækker sig frem til 1898; egentligt helt til nu.

Efter den korte præsentation af filippinsk historie, med vægten lagt på det multi-etnisk/kulturelle, hvilket i sammenhængen er den relevant vinkel, komme der en cirka 10 minutter lang snak med ambassadør Jan Top Christensen. Og det viser sig, at han er glimrende til mundtlig fremstilling. Rolig stemmeføring, holder sig til sagen (hvem kan vi forvente vinder, hvorfor, hvem er han) (Rodrigo Duterte), betydning for Danmark. (tyndt, men der er ikke meget at sige). Jan Top kommer med den interesante oplysning, at det i ambassadør kredse ses Duterte som fit for embedet. Den slags er selvfølgelig handlet med det politiske lag i deres hovedstæder. Så det skal blive spændende at følge, hvordan det spinder af i forhold NGOer der har brugt årtier på, at have Duterte som hadeobjekt. Og ikke mindst hvilken lære man operationelt kan uddrage af at nakken kan knækkes på disse NGO bæster.

Kan høres her.

Knallertrockere i Manila

I den kommende uge vil knallertrockerne fra 2100 Spelt, D-A-D, give koncert i Manila, på Manila Hotel. Koncerten er et led i D-A-Ds tour, Far Out in the Far East in Fifteen. Hvad far east delen angår ser det udtil, at være en slags markedsførings/networking event rettet mod fastboende danskere. Den offentlige koncert (der er også en lukket) i Manila skulle efter Jan Top Christensens FB at dømme ske som led i fejringen af en dansk NGOs 25 års jubilæum for tilstedeværelse på de Filippinske øer. UH gætter på der må være tale om Red Barnet.

DAD er vidst ikke længre et stort hit, og ser nærmest ud til at være igang med at presse citronen efter fordums storhed. Det store internationale gennembrud udeblev, men mindre kan gøre det såsom, at være et velkedt europæisk koncertband med jobs i bogen.

UH har ikke en mening om hvilke job D-A-D påtager sig eller om deres chancer for et SEA gennebrud a la Michael Learns to Rock. Måske på filippinerne, hvor man elsker at lege med sproget og den type musik og lyrik, der er D-A-Ds kendemærke.  Eksempelvis sutokil, som også er et spil på shoot to kill.

Tilgengæld har vi en mening om skatteyder betalt NGO virksomhed. Og den er, at det er spild af penge at give dem noget som helst, privat som offentligt. De eneste benificanter er de ansatte i NGO og dem der har sat den op. Hvad Red Barnet angår er en af bagmændene den dansk gifte rigmand Alan Parker og hans “Oak foundation”. For det første er det smart, at sætte et eller andet op som andre bidrager til uden man behøver spørge dem. For det andet er velgørenhed en mindre vulgær måde, at pleje politiske kontakter på, end blot at aflevere en brun kuvert. Det kan man så have folk til andre steder i “systemet”.

Hvad DAD angår så har de tilsyneladende fundet sig en niche, formetlig gennem venskaber i “systemet”, der gør at de bruges til festivitas i NGO sammenhæng. Jobene skal være dem vel undt, men det er ikke en skatteyder opgave, at betale for at de spiller til i princippet private fester. I 2014 samarbejdede de således med Poul Nyrup og SIND. Den Poul Nyrup der tilbage i 1999 med øjnene lysende af vildt had udtalt “stuerene bliver I aldrig” om DF og deres vælgere, der som bekendt ikke synes det er en særlig god ide, at danmark udsættes jihad terror angreb.

DAD med Nyrup.

Måske musikken, uden Nyrup, kunne være underlægning til det her?

 

 

 

Thrilla in Manila

Tilbage i 1975 udkæmpedes en af kampene, i en serie af boksekampe mellem Ali og Fraizer i Quezon City, Metro Manila. I afvigte uge var der begivenheder af betydeligt mindre betydning, og ligeledes i den kommende også, i Manila, med dansk islæt.

Folketingets Præsidie var på besøg for bl.a., at markere genåbningen af den danske ambassade.

Fra præsidiets meddelelse:

Under besøget skal Præsidiet mødes med en lang række politikere, herunder senatsformanden, formanden for Repræsentanternes Hus og Filippinernes udenrigsminister. Præsidiet mødes desuden bl.a. med Filippinernes ombudsmand, kommissæren for menneskerettigheder, præsidenten for den asiatiske udviklingsbank (ADB), diverse NGO’ere og repræsentanter for dansk erhvervsliv. Der bliver også lejlighed til at mødes med kommissionen for oversøiske filippinere for at drøfte spørgsmål om de mange filippinske sømænd og au pairs, som er ansat af danske rederier og familier.

Danmark har netop åbnet ambassade i Filippinerne, og Præsidiet besøger derfor også ambassaden. Filippinerne spiller en stor rolle politisk og økonomisk i Sydøstasien, og har de seneste år har oplevet høje økonomiske vækstrater og er med sine omkring 100 mio. indbyggere et potentielt stort marked for dansk erhvervsliv.

Deltagere
Mogens Lykketoft (S), Folketingets formand
Bertel Haarder (V)
Pia Kjærsgaard (DF)
Lone Loklindt (RV)
Per Clausen (EL)

Øvrige deltagere
Carsten U. Larsen, Folketingets direktør
Peter Krab, pressesekretær
Dorte Andersen, protokolmedarbejder

Budget
375.000

Fotos fra begivenheden, indtil videre tilgængelige via ambassadør Jan Top Christensens FB, er temmeligt ensidigt taget nærmest udelukkende med den korrupte Mogens Lykketoft i fokus og på en måde så han kommer til, at tage sig ud som en verdenspolitiker. Han er som bekendt, primært en lokal tyran i Danmark, hvor han bl.a. har stået for nationaliseringen af private telefonselskaber som siden blev videresolgt i et spil, hvor diverse politikere blev beriget.

ft presidie med fsec arosario

I midten med camisa style skjorte er Forign Secretary Alberto del Rosario. Til højre i billedet Lone Loklindt og Per Clausen, to islamofile danske politikere, især berygtede for deres belyvninger af modstandere af udlændingeloven af 1983 med noget de kalder “racisme” og nazisme. Yderst til venstre i billedet er Pia Kjærsgaard, vel den betydeligste nulevende danske politiker.

lykketoft arosarioDen korrupte Lykketoft som verdensmand.

Det undre ikke, at ambassadør Christensen på de indtil videre offentliggjorte billeder lader Lykketoft fremstå nærmest solo. Det var under Lykketoft han blev forfremmet til toppen af udenrigstjenesten på trods af det forhold, at han har en fortid som venstreekstremist og sovjet apologet. Mere om ham her.

A pro pos

De dømte var Christen Amby, Vietnam-komiteens kasserer Ingela Kyrre samt en ung 23-årig stud.polit. ved navn Mogens Lykketoft . Han var dengang formand for den socialdemokratiske studenterbevægelse Frit Forum, der sammen med Kommunistisk Forbund og Revolutionær Aktion havde tilsluttet sig Otto Sands Vietnam-indsamling.

Mere her.

Under Vietnam krigen deltog filippinske tropper i oprydningen efter de socialistiske krigsforbrydelser, som Lykketoft har dom for han støttede. Mere her, p 62-82.

 

Lidt om HCA og Rizal

Den danske ambassadør på Filippinerne har opdaget der er en forbindelse mellem Hans Christian Andersen og Jose Rizal og fortæller det på FB og twitter med henvisning til denne artikel. Ambassadøren, Jan Top Christensen, har UH omtalt bl.a. her.

Forbindelsen går videre end, at Rizal oversatte HCA til Tagalog, som er største sprog på Filippinerne og grundlag for filipino, den officielle fælles dialekt, omend den ikke tales af andre end tagalog talende og hverken er størst eller tales af en majoritet. Der er over 100 sprog på Filippinerne.

Rizal oversatte en lang række HCA tekster, i første omgang i breve til familien mens han opholdt sig i Europa, ikke mindst Tyskland. Nogen af oversættelserne blev så udgivet i en bog. Der står et eksemplar på HCA biblioteket i Odense. Rizal har skrevet tekster om mangt og meget. Omdrejningspunkt er dannelse af en Filippinsk nation og ikke mindst i den forbindelse, undervisning af folk i deres egen historien som middel til at nå målet. Rizal var en del af den gruppe der kendes som “propaganda movement”, som så i øvrigt ikke var enige om metoder og mål. Skulle man gå efter sit mål med magt og skulle man gå efter fuld selvstændighed, eller en ordning som ligeværdig partner indenfor en spansk ramme? Rizal var af den opfattelse, at forsøg med magt var tiden ikke moden til, med det synspunkt at det blandt andet handlede om folks bevidsthed om egen plads i historien, hvorfor uddannelse af samme grund måtte ses som en hjørnesten for videre udvikling. Målet, fællesskab på lige fod med Spanien eller fuld uafhængighed, var et spørgsmål hvor han var tilfreds med en af delene.

På nutidens politiskeskala kan han ses som nationalist, og liberal på økonomiske spørgsmål. Socialisme afviser han, med en kort bemærkning om, at det ikke passer til sædvane på øerne, samt at folk i de lavere økonomiske klasser har det bedre end deres tilsvarende i Spanien. Islam, hvor han udemærket kendte koranen, så han som en kilde til barberi og tilbageskridt. I sit personlige liv var han kosmopolit, men spor af synspunkter om, at al verdens folk skal gøres til ét, finder man ikke. Eller for den sags skyld, at kosmopolitisme skal gå forud for nationale interesser. I et dagbogs notat skrevet under et ophold i USA (med iagtagelser fra et ophold på en togstation), at visse (racer) ser ud til at leve i kummer kår og at det må overkommes, hvis USA skal være/blive én nation.

Tilbage til hans brug af HCA, det indskrænker sig ikke til oversættelse, HCA bruges som inspiratorisk kilde i ting han har skrevet f.eks. i dette citat fra Noli me Tangera (The Social Cancer):

“Listen, mother, to what I’ve been thinking about. Today there arrived from Spain the son of the dead Don Rafael, and he will be a good man like his father. Well now, mother, tomorrow you will get Crispin, collect my wages, and say that I will not be a sacristan any longer. As soon as I get well I’ll go to see Don Crisostomo and ask him to hire me as a herdsman of his cattle and carabaos—I’m now big enough. Crispin can study with old Tasio, who does not whip and who is a good man, even if the curate does not believe so. What have we to fear now from the padre? Can he make us any poorer than we are? You may believe it, mother, the old man is good. I’ve seen him often in the church when no one else was about, kneeling and praying, believe it. So, mother, I’ll stop being a sacristan. I earn but little and that little is taken away from me in fines. Every one complains of the same thing. I’ll be a herdsman and by performing my tasks carefully I’ll make my employer like me. Perhaps he’ll let us milk a cow so that we can drink milk—Crispin likes milk so much. Who can tell! Maybe they’ll give us a little calf if they see that I behave well and we’ll take care of it and fatten it like our hen. I’ll pick fruits in the woods and sell them in the town along with the vegetables from our garden, so we’ll have money. I’ll set snares and traps to catch birds and wild cats,2 I’ll fish in the river, and when I’m bigger, I’ll hunt. I’ll be able also to cut firewood to sell or to present to the owner of the cows, and so he’ll be satisfied with us. When I’m able to plow, I’ll ask him to let me have a piece of land to plant in sugar-cane or corn and you won’t have to sew until midnight. We’ll [117]have new clothes for every fiesta, we’ll eat meat and big fish, we’ll live free, seeing each other every day and eating together. Old Tasio says that Crispin has a good head and so we’ll send him to Manila to study. I’ll support him by working hard. Isn’t that fine, mother? Perhaps he’ll be a doctor, what do you say?”

“What can I say but yes?” said Sisa as she embraced her son. She noted, however, that in their future the boy took no account of his father, and shed silent tears.

Basilio went on talking of his plans with the confidence of the years that see only what they wish for. To everything Sisa said yes—everything appeared good.

Sleep again began to weigh down upon the tired eyelids of the boy, and this time Ole-Luk-Oie, of whom Andersen tells us, spread over him his beautiful umbrella with its pleasing pictures. Now he saw himself with his little brother as they picked guavas, alpay, and other fruits in the woods; they clambered from branch to branch, light as butterflies; they penetrated into the caves and saw the shining rocks; they bathed in the springs where the sand was gold-dust and the stones like the jewels in the Virgin’s crown. The little fishes sang and laughed, the plants bent their branches toward them laden with golden fruit. Then he saw a bell hanging in a tree with a long rope for ringing it; to the rope was tied a cow with a bird’s nest between her horns and Crispin was inside the bell.

Thus he went on dreaming, while his mother, who was not of his age and who had not run for an hour, slept not.

and this time Ole-Luk-Oie, of whom Andersen tells us, er en note fra oversætter Charles Derbyshire, der ikke findes i den spansk sprogede original. 

I øvrigt er Noli et must read for nationalt orienterede. Udover at være vittig og morsom; en kærligheds historie (om Rizals egen ungdoms kærlighed) så bliver de træk ved folk der danner en nation påpeget, hvordan man kommer videre derfra osv. Dertil er det mesterlig propaganda som man kan lære af. Og bogen og Rizal var trods forbud mod bogen, almindeligt kendt på øerne i samtiden. Og person galleriet i bogen er hentet ud af virkeligheden, de virkelige personer bag karaktererne er kendte.

 

HCAs Ole Luk øje:

Ole Lukøie.I hele Verden er der ingen, der kan saa mange Historier, som Ole Lukøie! – Han kan rigtignok fortælle!

Saadan ud paa Aftenen, naar Børn sidde nok saa net ved Bordet, eller paa deres Skammel, kommer Ole Lukøie; han kommer saa stille op ad Trappen; for han gaaer paa Hosesokker, han lukker ganske sagte Døren op og fut! saa sprøiter han Børnene sød Mælk ind i Øinene, saa fiint, saa fiint, men dog altid nok til at de ikke kunne holde Øinene aabne, og derfor ikke see ham; han lister sig lige bag ved, blæser dem sagte i Nakken, og saa blive de tunge i Hovedet, o ja! men det gjør ikke ondt, for Ole Lukøie mener det just godt med Børnene, han vil bare have at de skulle være rolige, og det ere de bedst, naar man faaer dem i Seng, de skulle være stille, for at han kan fortælle dem Historier. –

Naar Børnene nu sove, sætter Ole Lukøie sig paa Sengen; han er godt klædt paa, hans Frakke er af Silketøi, men det er ikke mueligt at sige, hvad Couleur den har, for den skinner grøn, rød og blaa, alt ligesom han dreier sig; under hver Arm holder han en Paraply, een med Billeder paa, og den sætter han over de gode Børn, og saa drømme de hele Natten de deiligste Historier, og een Paraply har han, hvor der slet intet er paa, og den sætter han over de uartige Børn, saa sove de saa tosset og har om Morgenen, naar de vaagne, ikke drømt det allermindste.

 

Visitor from Denmark to Philippines

These days homophile member of danish goverment Mogens Jensen visit the Philippines. We hope he will not study the ladyboys and stick to opening the embassy and promote trade and not aid. Danish taxpayers can not afford the latter, coz socialist gov’ have already spent also that money.

You can read our portrait of danish ambassador to the Philippines, Jan Top Christensen, her. His an old communist and leftist war monger, we think not former.

We note, that Ferdinand “BongBong” Marcos, are the lucky “owner” of a wind-farm, equipt with danish designed Vestas wind-tubines.

S´por Lee Kuan Yew have an acount on filipinos, the Philippines and the fall of Marcos. We quote it from here.

Notes will be put on this post later.

(The following excerpt is taken from pages 299 – 305 from Lee Kuan Yew’s book “From Third World to First”, Chapter 18  “Building Ties with Thailand, the Philippines, and Brunei”)

*

The Philippines was a world apart from us, running a different style of politics and government under an American military umbrella. It was not until January 1974 that I visited President Marcos in Manila. When my Singapore Airlines plane flew into Philippine airspace, a small squadron of Philippine Air Force jet fighters escorted it to Manila Airport. There Marcos received me in great style – the Filipino way. I was put up at the guest wing of Malacañang Palace in lavishly furnished rooms, valuable objects of art bought in Europe strewn all over. Our hosts were gracious, extravagant in hospitality, flamboyant. Over a thousand miles of water separated us. There was no friction and little trade. We played golf, talked about the future of ASEAN, and promised to keep in touch.

His foreign minister, Carlos P. Romulo, was a small man of about five feet some 20 years my senior, with a ready wit and a self-deprecating manner about his size and other limitations. Romulo had a good sense of humor, an eloquent tongue, and a sharp pen, and was an excellent dinner companion because he was a wonderful raconteur, with a vast repertoire of anecdotes and witticisms. He did not hide his great admiration for the Americans. One of his favourite stories was about his return to the Philippines with General MacArthur. As MacArthur waded ashore at Leyte, the water reached his knees but came up to Romulo’s chest and he had to swim ashore. His good standing with ASEAN leaders and with Americans increased the prestige of the Marcos administration. Marcos had in Romulo a man of honor and integrity who helped give a gloss of respectability to his regime as it fell into disrepute in the 1980s.

In Bali in 1976, at the first ASEAN summit held after the fall of Saigon, I found Marcos keen to push for greater economic cooperation in ASEAN. But we could not go faster than the others. To set the pace, Marcos and I agreed to implement a bilateral Philippines-Singapore across-the-board 10 percent reduction of existing tariffs on all products and to promote intra-ASEAN trade. We also agreed to lay a Philippines-Singapore submarine cable. I was to discover that for him, the communiqué was the accomplishment itself; its implementation was secondary, an extra to be discussed at another conference.

We met every two to three years. He once took me on a tour of his library at Malacañang, its shelves filled with bound volumes of newspapers reporting his activities over the years since he first stood for elections. There were encyclopedia-size volumes on the history and culture of the Philippines with his name as the author. His campaign medals as an anti-Japanese guerrilla leader were displayed in glass cupboards. He was the undisputed boss of all Filipinos. Imelda, his wife, had a penchant for luxury and opulence. When they visited Singapore before the Bali summit they came in stye in two DC8’s, his and hers.

Marcos did not consider China a threat for the immediate future, unlike Japan. He did not rule out the possibility of an aggressive Japan, if circumstances changed. He had memories of the horrors the Imperial Army had inflicted on Manila. We had strongly divergent views on the Vietnamese invasion and occupation of Cambodia. While he, pro forma, condemned the Vietnamese occupation, he did not consider it a danger to the Philippines. There was the South China Sea separating them and the American navy guaranteed their security. As a result, Marcos was not active on the Cambodian question. Moreover, he was to become preoccupied with the deteriorating security in his country.

Marcos, ruling under martial law, had detained opposition leader Benigno (Ninoy) Aquino, reputed to be as charismatic and powerful a campaigner as he was. He freed Aquino and allowed him to go to the United States. As the economic situation in the Philippines deteriorated, Aquino announced his decision to return. Mrs. Marcos issued several veiled warnings. When the plane arrived at Manila Airport from Taipei in August 1983, he was shot as he descended from the aircraft. A whole posse of foreign correspondents with television camera crews accompanying him on the aircraft was not enough protection.

International outrage over the killing resulted in foreign banks stopping all loans to the Philippines, which owed over US$25 billion and could not pay the interest due. This brought Marcos to the crunch. He sent his minister for trade and industry, Bobby Ongpin, to ask me for a loan of US$300-500 million to meet the interest payments. I looked him straight in the eye and said, “We will never see that money back.” Moreover, I added, everyone knew that Marcos was seriously ill and under constant medication for a wasting disease. What was needed was a strong, healthy leader, not more loans.

Shortly afterward, in February 1984, Marcos met me in Brunei at the sultanate’s independence celebrations. He had undergone a dramatic physical change. Although less puffy than he had appeared on television, his complexion was dark as if he had been out in the sun. He was breathing hard as he spoke, his voice was soft, eyes bleary, and hair thinning. He looked most unhealthy. An ambulance with all the necessary equipment and a team of Filipino doctors were on standby outside his guest bungalow. Marcos spent much of the time giving me a most improbable story of how Aquino had been shot.

As soon as all our aides left, I went straight to the point, that no bank was going to lend him any money. They wanted to know who was going to succeed him if anything were to happen to him; all the bankers could see that he no longer looked healthy. Singapore banks had lent US$8 billion of the US$25 billion owing. The hard fact was they were not likely to get repayment for some 20 years. He countered that it would be only eight years. I said the bankers wanted to see a strong leader in the Philippines who could restore stability, and the Americans hoped the election in May would throw up someone who could be such a leader. I asked whom he would nominate for the election. He said Prime Minister Cesar Virata. I was blunt. Virata was a nonstarter, a first-class administrator but no political leader; further, his most politically astute colleague, defense minister Juan Ponce Enrile, was out of favour. Marcos was silent, then he admitted that succession was the nub of the problem. If he could find a successor, there would be a solution. As I left, he said, “You are a true friend.” I did not understand him. It was a strange meeting.

With medical care, Marcos dragged on. Cesar Virata met me in Singapore in January the following year. He was completely guileless, a political innocent. He said that Mrs. Imelda Marcos was likely to be nominated as the presidential candidate. I asked how that could be when there were other weighty candidates, including Juan Ponce Enrile and Blas Ople, the labor minister. Virata replied it had to do with “flow of money; she would have more money than other candidates to pay for the votes needed for nomination by the party and to win the election. He added that if she were the candidate, the opposition would put up Mrs. Cory Aquino and work up the people’s feelings. He said the economy was going down with no political stability.

The denouement came in February 1986 when Marcos held presidential elections which he claimed he won. Cory Aquino, the opposition candidate, disputed this and launched a civil disobedience campaign. Defense Minister Juan Enrile defected and admitted election fraud had taken place, and the head of the Philippine constabulary, Lieutenant General Fidel Ramos, joined him. A massive show of “people power” in the streets of Manila led to a spectacular overthrow of a dictatorship. The final indignity was on 25 February 1986, when Marcos and his wife fled in U.S. Air Force helicopters from Malacañang Palace to Clark Air Base and were flown to Hawaii. This Hollywood-style melodrama could only have happened in the Philippines.

Mrs. Aquino was sworn in as president amid jubilation. I had hopes that this honest, God-fearing woman would help regain confidence for the Philippines and get the country back on track. I visited her that June, three months after the event. She was a sincere, devout Catholic who wanted to do her best for her country by carrying out what she believed her husband would have done had he been alive, namely, restore democracy to the Philippines. Democracy would then solve their economic and social problems. At dinner, Mrs. Aquino seated the chairman of the constitutional commission, Chief Justice Cecilia Muñoz-Palma, next to me. I asked the learned lady what lessons her commission had learned from the experience of the last 40 years since independence in 1946 would guide her in drafting the constitution. She answered without hesitation, “We will not have any reservations or limitations on our democracy. We must make sure that no dictator can ever emerge to subvert the constitution.” Was there no incompatibility of the American-type separation of powers with the culture and habits of the Filipino people that had caused problems for the presidents before Marcos? Apparently none.

Endless attempted coups added to Mrs. Aquino’s problems. The army and the constabulary had been politicized. Before the ASEAN summit in December 1987, a coup was threatened. Without President Suharto’s firm support the summit would have been postponed and confidence in Aquino’s government undermined. The Philippine government agreed that the responsibility for security should be shared between them and the other ASEAN governments, in particular the Indonesian government. General Benny Moerdani, President Suharto’s trusted aide, took charge. He positioned an Indonesian warship in the middle of Manila Bay with helicopters and a commando team ready to rescue the ASEAN heads of government if there should be a coup attempt during the summit. I was included in their rescue plans. I wondered if such a rescue could work but decided to go along with the arrangements, hoping that the show of force would scare off the coup leaders. We were all confined to the Philippine Plaza Hotel by the seafront facing Manila Bay where we could see the Indonesian warship at anchor. The hotel was completely sealed off and guarded. The summit went off without any mishap. We all hoped that this show of united support for Mrs. Aquino’s government at a time when there were many attempts to destabilize it would calm the situation.

It made no difference. There were more coup attempts, discouraging investments badly needed to create jobs. This was a pity because they had so many able people, educated in the Philippines and the United States. Their workers were English-speaking, at least in Manila. There was no reason why the Philippines should not have been one of the more successful of the ASEAN countries. In the 1950s and 1960s, it was the most developed, because America had been generous in rehabilitating the country after the war. Something was missing, a gel to hold society together. The people at the top, the elite mestizos, had the same detached attitude to the native peasants as the mestizos in their haciendas in Latin America had toward their peons. They were two different societies: Those at the top lived a life of extreme luxury and comfort while the peasants scraped a living, and in the Philippines it was a hard living. They had no land but worked on sugar and coconut plantations. They had many children because the church discouraged birth control. The result was increasing poverty.

It was obvious that the Philippines would never take off unless there was substantial aid from the United States. George Shultz, the secretary of state, was sympathetic and wanted to help but made clear to me that the United States would be better able to do something if ASEAN showed support by making its contribution. The United States was reluctant to go it alone and adopt the Philippines as its special problem. Shultz wanted ASEAN to play a more prominent role to make it easier for the president to get the necessary votes in Congress. I persuaded Shultz to get the aid project off the ground in 1988, before President Reagan’s second term of office ended. He did. There were two meetings for a Multilateral Assistance Initiative (Philippines Assistance Programme): The first in Tokyo in 1989 brought US$3.5 billion in pledges, and the second in Hong Kong in 1991, under the Bush administration, yielded US$14 billion in pledges. But instability in the Philippines did not abate. This made donors hesitant and delayed the implementation of projects.

Mrs. Aquino’s successor, Fidel Ramos, whom she had backed, was more practical and established greater stability. In November 1992, I visited him. In a speech to the 18th Philippine Business Conference, I said, “I do not believe democracy necessarily leads to development. I believe what a country needs to develop is discipline more than democracy.” In private, President Ramos said he agreed with me that British parliamentary-type constitutions worked better because the majority party in the legislature was also the government. Publicly, Ramos had to differ.

He knew well the difficulties of trying to govern with strict American-style separation of powers. The senate had already defeated Mrs. Aquino’s proposal to retain the American bases. The Philippines had a rambunctious press but it did not check corruption. Individual press reporters could be bought, as could many judges. Something had gone seriously wrong. Millions of Filipino men and women had to leave their country for jobs abroad beneath their level of education. Filipino professionals whom we recruited to work in Singapore are as good as our own. Indeed, their architects, artists, and musicians are more artistic and creative than ours. Hundreds of thousands of them have left for Hawaii and for the American mainland. It is a problem the solution to which has not been made easier by the workings of a Philippine version of the American constitution.

The difference lies in the culture of the Filipino people. It is a soft, forgiving culture. Only in the Philippines could a leader like Ferdinand Marcos, who pillaged his country for over 20 years, still be considered for a national burial. Insignificant amounts of the loot have been recovered, yet his wife and children were allowed to return and engage in politics. They supported the winning presidential and congressional candidates with their considerable resources and reappeared in the political and social limelight after the 1998 election that returned President Joseph Estrada. General Fabian Ver, Marcos’s commander-in-chief who had been in charge of security when Aquino was assassinated, had fled the Philippines together with Marcos in 1986. When he died in Bangkok, the Estrada government gave the general military honors at his burial. One Filipino newspaper, Today, wrote on 22 November 1998, “Ver, Marcos and the rest of the official family plunged the country into two decades of lies, torture, and plunder. Over the next decade, Marcos’s cronies and immediate family would tiptoe back into the country, one by one – always to the public’s revulsion and disgust, though they showed that there was nothing that hidden money and thick hides could not withstand.” Some Filipinos write and speak with passion. If they could get their elite to share their sentiments and act, what could they not have achieved?

*

President Noynoy Aquino and everyone in his cabinet and staff (all secretaries down to the director level) should all get copies of “From Third World to First” and read the book at least twice.

* * *

Lee Kuan Yew’s Profile:

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew (Hakka for李光耀 – Lî Guang Yào in Mandarin) born “Harry Lee Kuan Yew” and known simply as “Harry” to close friends, family, and his late wife, was born in Singapore on September 16, 1923,  a third-generation descendant of immigrants from the Hakka dialect-group hailing from China’s Guangdong Province. He finished law at Cambridge University, England. In 1954, he formed the People’s Action Party, which won the first Singapore general election five years later. Though dominantly English-speaking and fluent in Malay, but originally unable to competently converse in Mandarin or other Chinese dialects, he decided at an advanced age to exert intense effort to learn Mandarin and later Hokkien, because he needed both for political campaigns at the grassroots level. He also changed his public persona from being a British-educated British-accented upper-class Anglophile named “Harry Lee” to being known in public and in the papers as “Lee Kuan Yew.”

Lee Kuan Yew  became Singapore’s first prime minister in 1959, at the age of thirty-five and quickly developed Singapore’s economy through the aggressive invitation of foreign Multinational Corporations by avoiding economic protectionism and creating a business-friendly environment in order to concentrate on the immediate task of job creation for the ordinary citizens. In November 1990, he resigned the office to assume the advisory post of Senior Minister in the Singapore Cabinet and in 2004, took on the title of the “emeritus” role of  Minister Mentor when his successor as Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong (吳作棟)became Senior Minister after Goh resigned the premiership.

Terror attack on media in Paris

MSM BBC reports 11 killed:

Gunmen have attacked the Paris office of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, killing 11 people and injuring 10, French officials say.

Its latest tweet was a cartoon of the Islamic State militant group leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

An eyewitness, Benoit Bringer, told French TV channel Itele: “Two black-hooded men entered the building with Kalashnikovs. A few minutes later we heard lots of shots.”

The magazine was fire-bombed in November 2011 a day after it carried a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad.

Its overwhelming linkly a mohammdanian terrorist attack. Since 2001 espicially media not showing the requested servitude from islam has been under fire. Most deadly media attack from mohammdanians since 2001 has been the Maguindanao massacre let aside, said attack was rooted in a dispute between two muhammedanian local clans. Never the less, most killed was non mohammedanians.

Wiki on Charlie Hebdo. It seems wiki get updatede continiously on this latest event.

Danish socialdemocrat and secretay fo r trade and “development”, Mogens Jensen, are visiting the Philippines comming january 22 and 23, has back in 2010 wrote an article “Make space for islam in europe”. UH wonders if this is the result of lack of space.

Danish ambassador to the Philippines, Jan Top Christensen, an islamophile has previously wrote articles, argueing that Libanon was, thanks to islamic influence, a succesfull multicultural nation.

Update:

EFJ, European Federation of Journalists, has this statement. Not a single word such as muslim, islam, quran or others that tell who is actualy the perpetrators. (Its no longer speculation, the scream “alhua akbar” was heard).

Media “blitzkrieg” down playing the role of islam has now started and “islam is the religion of Peace”, and it has nothing to do with islam.

UK progressive The Guardian explain how this was the result of islamophobia:

Observant Muslims anywhere would be angered by such images. That is especially true of fundamentalist Salafis, who adhere to traditions laid down in 7th-century Arabia, or of the small minority who hold to the jihadi-takfiri world view espoused by Isis and al-Qaida. Their doctrines permit the killing of so-called apostates. But devout Sunni Muslims of all stripes avoid visual depictions of Muhammad or other prophets such as Moses or Abraham.

Islam is not unique. Judaism forbids the use of “graven images” and Christianity has at times frowned on visual representations of sacred figures, allowing only the cross to be depicted in churches.

The Qur’an does not explicitly forbid images of Muhammad, but several hadith (sayings and actions attributed to the prophet) prohibit Muslims from creating visual depictions of human figures. Traditionally, the concern has been that images may encourage idolatry, the scourge of the jahiliyya period of pre-Islamic Arabia.

Danish politicians do not mention islam at all:

“France has been hit by a terror attack. Completely defenceless and innocent people have fallen victim to what appears to be an attack on the freedom of expression,” Thorning-Schmidt [PM] said in a statement.

“Horrified by the Charlie Hebdo attack. Strong condemnation. Full solidarity with the victims and France. We must defend the freedom of speech,” Foreign Minister Martin Lidegaard wrote on Twitter.

“The terror attack is in every way tragic and is not just an attack against the magazine but against all of us,” Social Minister Manu Sareen wrote on Twitter.

Both Mr. Lidegaard and Mr. Sareen are reprenstetives of party “Radikale Venstre” wich during WWII was allied with Mr. Hitler, a well know admire of islam.

Michelle Malkin back in 2006:

Muslims consider it sacrilegious to produce a likeness of the Prophet Mohammad. CNN has chosen to not show the cartoons in respect for Islam.

Unbelievable. The news network reports on an international controversy, but refuses to show readers what the news is actually about and let them judge the cartoons for themselves.

Even more galling is CNN’s newfound respect for religion.

Where was that deference when Ted Turner was calling Catholics “Jesus Freaks?”

thereligionofpeace.com has collected polls one how muhammdanians look shari terrorism etc. etc.:

Muslim Opinion Polls

A “Tiny Minority of Extremists”?

“Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be
unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is their destination.”

Quran 9:73

Have you heard that Islam is a peaceful religion because most Muslims live peacefully and that only a “tiny minority of extremists” practice violence?  That’s like saying that White supremacy must be perfectly fine since only a tiny minority of racists ever hurt anyone.  Neither does it explain why religious violence is largely endemic to Islam, despite the tremendous persecution of religious minorities in Muslim countries.

In truth, even a tiny minority of “1%” of Muslims worldwide translates to 15 million believers – which is hardly an insignificant number.  However, the “minority” of Muslims who approve of terrorists, their goals, or their means of achieving them is much greater than this.  In fact, it isn’t even a true minority in some cases, depending on how goals and targets are defined.

The following polls convey what Muslims say are their attitudes toward terrorism, al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, the 9/11 attacks, violence in defense of Islam, Sharia, honor killings, and matters concerning assimilation in Western society.  The results are all the more astonishing because most of the polls were conducted by organizations with an obvious interest in “discovering” agreeable statistics that downplay any cause for concern.

(These have been compiled over the years, so not all links remain active.  We will continue adding  to this).

 

raw Sketch of an ambassador (Jan Top christensen)

The following is a look at the person Jan Top Christensen as far as google and internet allow it within a short time frame. The aim is to have a note at hand for future use and to share the information with whoever it may concern.

As for the time from 7 years old until his years at university he gives in a interwive this:

”Den antiautoritære tankegang har fulgt Jan længe. som ung studerende var han gennem et par år medlem af studenterfronten på aarhus universitet, hvis mål blandt andet lød på lige medbestemmelse for studerende og oprettelsen af fagkritiske grupper, og han
var medstifter af og redaktør på det samfundsvidenskabelige og -kritiske tidsskrift grus. i
studieårene brugte han også en stor del af sin fritid på at oprette trøjborg Beboerforening i
aarhus. foreningens formål var at mobilisere de lokale beboere til at forbedre levevilkårene i kvarteret gennem byfornyelse, trafikregulering og oprettelse af beboerhus; alt sammen skete i tæt samarbejde med kommunen, der i første omgang var modstræbende, men senere tog initiativerne til sig og gennemførte dem.
evnen til at mobilisere på tværs af befolkningen var en nyttig erfaring. Jan lærte dog allerede fra syvårsalderen, hvordan tingene faktisk kan fungere rigtig godt, når hierarkierne blødes op, og alle får medbestemmelse. inspireret af sin far og sine to ældre søskende blev han’ulveunge’ hos kfuM spejderne i svendborg.”

English extract:
At seven he joined the Y.M.C.A scout group upon inspiration from father and his two elder siblings. The text then, is silent until university years.
He declares himself ”Anti-authoritarian” and a member of ”Studenterfronten” for a couple of years.
He was a co-founder of periodical ”GRUS”, along he participated in founding ”Trøjborg Beboerforening.

The keywords here; anti-authoritarian, Studenterfronten, GRUS and Trøjborg Beboerforening, begs for a explanatory note:

Anti-authorian
It can very well be, that Mr. Christensen actually is anti-authorian in the sense of the word that he first and foremost believe in leadership by encouragement, soft-power and so on. It seams so. But the term also refer to how the campus political environment was divided in the 1970s. Very roughly, on leftist side there where to wings; die hard marxist such as leninist, maoists, moscow communist and the alike, but also a soft wing, more flower-power like. Even today some of the participants at the two wings, now retired professors, are fighting each other in public. (Helmuth Nyborg and Jens Mammen). But, the other possible opportunity, that Mr. Christensen was actually a hard core leftist and now wants to downplay that by using the word anti-authorian has to be considered in the lack of  material that place him, at one of the two wings.

Studenterfronten
Was and is now regarded as a extreme left militant organization at Aarhus University. There method or SOP was to act as parasites to other student groups along with bullying out opponents. They where at a point under surveillance by the intelligence unit of the police. A  police officer concluded in his report, that there was 15 active members, able to call in 200 for support and that the group was run by psychopaths. This is known because the police intelligence unit, PET,  later on became subject to investigation itself. At that time Aarhus University had a total number of 12.000 students.
Link to the relevant part of this investigation.

GRUS
Was/is? a periodical for critical social sience and the humanities. The word ”critical” means that in reality the periodical was a organ for marxism applied as a science. Credit to be given; they had success in putting work-environment and conditions on the agenda. But as well it must be mentioned, that they in cooperation with MSM acted bullish to opponents.

Trøjborg Beboerforening
Was a offspring from ”Studenterfronten” meant to ”mobilize” the masses (the working class) as the hidden agenda, and a front agenda to improve life conditions in a certain area. Some credit must be given, they actually ended up being a catalyst for improvements in said area.
After university mr. Christensen was employed as a researcher at university SDU. There seams not to be any specifics about this employment, but some articles and two books appears.

One book, about french politics, indicates some interest in the french revolution.

At the other two rewives are available.

https://tidsskrift.dk/index.php/politica/article/view/9779/18512

First one is written by mr. Christensen’ later on colleague as a danish ambassador, Carsten Søndergaard. The poor reader quality (mis spelling etc.) due to later PDF’ing. The version in the link is recommended.

Jan Top Christensen, USA-Vesteuropa-relationerne under forandring, sovjetiskee a synspunkter, Esbjerg: Sydjysk Universitetsforlag, 1987, 132 s., kr. 120,00.
Carsten Søndergaard

”I fortsættelse heraf skal anføres, at en central hypotese i bogen er, at »akademiske i Sovjet ofte forudskikker ændringer i sovjetisk udenrigspolitik« (p. 112). Selvom udsagnet svækkes efterfølgende ved, at der tales om et komplekst samspil mellem forskellige grupper fra det akademiske miljø, partisekretariatet og udenrigsministeriet, står essencen i hypotesen stadig. Spørgsmålet er selvfølgelig, ikke Top Christensen tillægger forskningsinstitutterne – som for eksempel og USA-Canada Instituttet – alt for stor indflydelse. Det burde ikke være ukendt, at der er adskillige amerikanske forskere, der er af en anden opfattelse. behøver således kun at henvise til den stående diskussion om, hvilken Georgi Arbatov har på udenrigspolitikken. Den er uden tvivl overvurderet i Vesten.
For det andet er det ofte ganske svært at adskille de refererende afsnit i bogen fra forfatterens egen opfattelse. Af og til fristes man til at tro, at der ikke er nogen forskel. Dette gælder for eksempel karakteristikken af den vesttyske politiker Franz Josef Straus som revanchist (p. 101). Det er muligt, at det er forfatterens egen vurdering. Den forekommer imidlertid mildest talt at være udtryk for en mangel på forståelse af vesttysk politik.” Link

From the review it appears that Mr. Christensen’ thesis has been that the foreign policy of the former soviet union has emerged from academic institutions.
1) Mr. Søndergaard then crack down that this is not what mr. Christensen shows in his book.
2) Mr. Christensen solely use of soviet sources written in western lingo.
3) Not taking the natural consequences or 2) by discussing this problem in depth
4) difficulties for the reader to distinguishes between whats rm. Christensen’ own opinion and his sources tell. Example being that mr. Christensen denounce late German politician Franz Josef Strauss a ”revanchist” (towards soviet union). mr. Søndergaard noting that this take a person without knowledge of German politics.
5) Mr Christensen then deals with SDI (soviet/west arms race) simply taking the soviet stand.
6) And arrive at the conclusions that soviet foreign policy have tendencies away from being ideological driven towards realistic driven and this will result in 1) a more unpredictable* soviet and 2) less dramatic policy. * (more likely, mr. Søndergaards has meant predictable.(
Mr. Søndergaard then comment that 1) seams likely but that 2) is unfounded in mr. Christensen’ work. And finally deem the work ”problematic”.

More friendly to Mr. Christensen’ work is this very short reviwe:
Link, text not copyble.

Note on context of mr. Christensen’ book.
There has since ”1800something” been a ”peace movement” in the western world. It’s partly founded in christianity and partly in socialism/marxism. The latter had been good in making this movement as a political tool and using it as propaganda to reach own ends. After WWII soviet union was seeking to make it’s influence through thees movements, using them as trojan horses.
Logic of thees movements was simple and stupid: In order to motivated the adversary to disarm by himself the west should simply disarm them self to the level where the west did not have capability to answer an aggression effectively; because if so; the adversary would not attack, but adjust himself to a lower level of capability.
This peeked in the 1980s in the west as well as in Denmark where most academics and journalist, who for some reason are mainly left leaning, if not leftist, was supportive to this setup.
It seams mr. Christensen with  no regrets, as an academic, has served as an argument provider, for said setup.

After his university career mr. Christensen became a UN employee 1987 – 1990.  He was a UN station chief for a refugee camp at Palawan for Vietnamese boat escapees. (the reason for calling them ”escapees” instead of  ”refugees” is they was strictly not so, BUT they had very good reason to escape and expect help from western countries, not alone the unsuccessful protection against the communist war mongers in north, western leftists was backstabbing them in their hate against USA and love towards the socialist in north)
And relevant because mr. Christensen as UN employee, and later on, has a co-responsibility for twisting the term ”refugee” to something its not, and  towards a person with a wish to emigrate, and at the same time making it a big industry.

He made videos on the life in the camp. Link to video.

Since 1990 he has been an employee of the Danish Foreign Service in various positions and since 2001 in top-positions.

At 9. may 2008 in danish newspaper ”Kristeligt Dagblad”, mr. Christensen then ambassador in Lebanon, his judgment on Hezbollah is: they are reasonable and not war seeking. Link.

He has hold talks with Hezbollah on a regular basis with the approval from then foreign secretary Per Stig Møller.  Link.

Excuse for freedom of speech. Via Snaphanen.dk and link to Snaphanen’ post by LFPC
When it comes to the controversial cartoons, Christensen feels that the freedom of speech enjoyed by Danish citizens should be balanced with an understanding of how that speech echoes abroad.
“Denmark is a country where the constitution includes freedom of expression,” he said, adding, however, that the Danish government has openly criticized the republication of the cartoons and “expressed respect for Islam as a world religion.”
“We live today in a global village. Technology makes it possible that comments meant to be heard nationally can end up in a village in Afghanistan. Danes have to understand that we have to take this into consideration,” he added.”
Link to article.

Click to access militaert_tidsskrift_140.aargang_nr.3_2011.pdf

In danish periodical ”Militært Tidsskrift” he has an analysis with the title ”Lebanon: Possibility of a arabic awkening?”

Militært Tidsskrift, 140. årgang – nr. 3 – oktober 2011, s. 73 – 80
Libanon: muligheder for en arabisk vækkelse?

”Militært Tidsskrift

Ambassadør i Libanon, Jan Top Christensen
Et signalement af en region i bevægelse
De arabiske lande har i alt for mange år være præget af politisk forstening og mange af dem af økonomisk stagnation, misrøgtet af en række diktatorer, der ved stærk repression var i stand til at holde befolkningen nede. Flere af disse lande er i mange år blevet betegnet ”moderate arabiske lande” og har været vigtige partnere for Vesten, mens styrernes modstandere blev dæmoniseret. Var Vesten reelt interesseret i demokrati i Mellemøsten, eller var det mere hensigtsmæssigt at have autoritære regimer, der sikrede vestlige interesser?
Den arabiske verden var i vidt omfang gåe ti stå. Mange mente, at demokrati ikke kunne forenes med islam. Andre fokuserede på staternes historiske oprindelse og strukturer, der var vanskelige at fjerne. Men omsider ser der ud til at ske noget, som måske vil ændre regionen uafvendeligt gennem de kommende år. Arab Revolution, Arab Uprising, Arab Awakening, Arab Spring er termer, vi alle har stødt på det sidste halve år hver gang, vi har åbnet aviser, internet og TV. De mange forskellige betegnelser signalerer både forskellige opfattelser af, hvad der sker og måske også forskellige forhåbninger. Mange er bange for, at ”foråret” vil blive afløst af ”efterår”, hvor nye ekstreme, udemokratiske religiøse styrer afløser de gamle regimer. Andre er mere optimistiske, og taler om, at man har passeret ”the point of no return”, hvor de folkelige krav om mere indflydelse og større lighed vil sætte sig igennem på et tidspunkt. Måske det er nyttigt at have den franske revolution i erindring og huske, at opgøret med det royale enevælde i 1789 kort efter blev afløst af et styre, der massivt undertrykte anderledes tænkende, og at vi skal frem til 1848, før der blev plads til noget, der bare ligner vore dages demokrati, som i øvrigt hurtigt blev afløst af kejserdømme for en tid.”

“Tahrir-pladsen fandt store arbejderdemonstrationer sted i Kairo og Alexandria, der trodsede Mubarak-styrets repression og dermed banede vejen for de unges krav om frihed og indflydelse.
Rami Khoury, leder af Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs, AUB, Libanon, har i sine mange analyser af den arabiske vækkelse kaldt termen ”det arabiske forår” for neo-orientalisme. Termen signalerer ifølge RK en opfattelse af, at alle arabere er ens og kan grupperes som en enkel kategori, der tænker og handler på samme måde. Vesten mangler at forstå implikationerne af de frie araberes egen søgen efter selvbestemmelse og definition af deres egenart i nationale politikker. En tid så Levanten ud til at blive mindre berørt af den folkelige protest og opstand, og mange troede i lang tid, at de eksisterende styrer i Syrien og Jordan havde tilstrækkelig folkelig opbakning til at ville være i stand til at tilpasse sig situationen med mindre justeringer. Præsidenten i Syrien udtrykte i et interview i januar 2011 med Wall Street Journal med stor selvtillid, at hvis de arabiske lande ikke havde reformeret allerede, så var det for sent. Den udtalelse har efterfølgende ramt ham hårdt i nakken som en boomerang. I dag anvender hans sikkerhedsstyrker brutale metoder til at bekæmpe de folkelige demonstrationer, som er ved at have bredt sig til de fleste større byer. Styret henviser til bevæbnede grupper med støtte udefra, som vil fjerne det sekulære styre. Styret har spillet ud med en række reformforslag, men mange tror efterhånden, at det er ” for lidt og for sent”. Der er stor usikkerhed mht., hvordan Syrien kommer ud af krisen. Vil det lykkes – i første omgang, som i Teheran i 2009 mht. ”den grønne bevægelse” – at svække protesten ved massiv repression, eller vil Syrien ende med at gå op i den sekteriske limning og komme ud i et kaotisk forløb, hvor det er svært at se noget egentligt alternativ til det nuværende styre?”

“Den arabiske vækkelse vil ikke foreløbig sætte sig store spor i Libanon af de mange grunde, der er givet ovenfor. Men det sekteriske politiske system vil fortsat give anledning til utilfredshed og på sigt gradvist kunne udgøre et mobiliseringsgrundlag for en bredere bevægelse i takt med, at uddannelsesniveaet hæves og hvis en række af de andre lande får succes med etableringen af et moderne demokrati. Libanon har fortsat behov for at komme fuldt ind i moderniteten. Libanon er reelt ikke en efterlignelsesværdig model for religiøs sameksistens, ”a message” som en katolsk pave højtideligt formulerede det. Consociationalismen fungerer ikke. En gennemførelse af Taef-aftalen fra 1989, der lagde op til at etablere et sekulært Libanon er vejen frem. Vil eksterne interesser tillade det?
Indførelse af forholdstalsvalgmetoden, som den nye indenrigsminister har lagt op til skal drøftes i parlamentet efteråret 2011, vil kunne bidrage til at begynde at demontere de gamle sekteriske ledere og traditionelle politiske familier. Realistisk skal man forvente mange forsøg på benspænd i forhold til den proces. Mange af de kræfter, der i dag har fordel af nuværende system vil åbent eller skjult forsøge at sætte en kæp i hjulet. ”


“Men Libanon står over for en udfordring, der her og nu kræver en umiddelbar mediering for at undgå, at særligt sunni-shia-modsætningen skærpes. Processen for det Særlige Tribunal for Libanon, der behandler mordet på Rafik Hariri i 2005, er startet. Hizbollah-medlemmer er blevet anklaget og sagen vil gå sin gang, uanset om de anklagede giver fremmøde i retten i Haag. Hvis Hizbollahs generalsekretær Hassan Nasrallah og Saad Hariri kunne genoptage den tætte dialog, som der var mellem Saads fader og Nasrallah, så kunne konsekvenserne af en proces, der af mange libanesere frygtes kan destabilisere Libanon, måske inddæmmes i tide. ”

 

 

The article is infested with well known marxist lingo, such as suppressed and class.
It’s not clear what he wants to show, but it seams to be something like ”Lebanon has prosperity.” and ”the arab spring might be a good ”development””, given passion from all party’s concerned, arguing the french revolution took a hundred years before democracy evolved. Since Lebanon has a huge population of muhammedanians, islam and the role islam wants to play is, of cause of importance. Mr. Christensen hardly touch the subject. Apart from this: ”Mange mente, at demokrati ikke kunne forenes med islam.” [Many held the opinion that democracy could not applies/unite with islam] note the past presences ”could”.
However, mr. Christensen seams to have a safe hand when it comes to mapping the political landscape, which is described in terms of sectarianism, which is a term that to a filipino or dane bears another meaning, namely small religious/political group. mr. Christens use it synonymously with political clan, -family and -dynasty. Maybe it’s used as a sub-group to those categories.
Also prominet in his article is inconsistencies. Exampel being that in mr. Christensen’ opinion, at one hand Lebanon is not suitble for “Consociationalismen”, on the other it must be brought to work.

Career
It may seams strange that a person who is related to the militant left can reach high office. Not in in Denmark many others there, has done that too. In the case of mr. Christensen it’s notably that his shift from a leading position to a high, occurs when Mogens Lykketoft are the secretary of foreign affairs. This position has later on been held by other figures known for extremist and/or wiered wives such as Per Stig Møller, (Lene Espersen, exseption), Villy Søvdal, Holger K. Nielsen and Martin Lidegaard.

Personal life
Not much, but wife should be Kieu Phung supposedly MD, and maybe one offspring.
Link
To summerize/conclude

Until his late 30′ mr. has held and worked for extreem leftist wive points. This continues to this day where he must be seen as apologetic towards islam, founded in the fact, that he refuse discussing islam where it’s actually relevant. And that’s a typical leftist feature. (the equivalent right side, is to say; yes there is problems, but…)

He pride himself with being “anti-authorian”. UH don’t think thats the case. He’s a person very good in mapping the social landscape sourounding him, and then his style of control and management is not giving direct orders, but instead using intriques, let others say the hard words and so forth. Remember, he has never been outside a environment (school, university, UN, political administration) where this style take a seriouse risk of loose. His career moore shows he’s a master in it. More over, in he’s time, and the places where he had been acting,  the danish policy has been to give money away. Sinces this is about non-material issues, it’s diffecult for any one to see if it was a reasonable bargin. See from the point of anyone in mr. Chritensen’ chair, it might be easier to covince those in the backoffice that the deal was ok, rather than ask for more. It’s called “the problem of moral hazard”.

From a Philippine perspective…e filipino one must hav

Let a side commercial trade and other normal functions of a embassy and an ambassador. He will bring with him money for NGO’. The way projects are prioritiezed, are in order to what benefit can it bring to the danish NGO the filipino counterpartner must have. At the money side the rule of 2/3 applies. It means that of a certain allocation 2/3 goes for salary in the danish NGO or there contractors. Of the left 1/3 2/3 goes for salary in the filipino NGO and there contactors. The remaining then goes for whatever in question. Kids, humanrights etc. The upcomming election in denmark (whith in one year) will allmost for sure change the political landscape for good, the political left will loos momentum. This means, in case you are seeking theese money, don’t corner yourself with a leftish agenda. If you are so much on the right wing, that it’s hard to down play, then wait and see what election bring.

 

A side from Jan TopChristensen himself, it worth to notice one of his journalistic aides: Nina Trige Andersen.
UH’ 7′ sense will not be surprised to see her as a staff at the danish Manila embassy.

She will be potraited later on but in brief:
She’ a journalist focusing on the Philippines among other topics, aminly NGO’, social stuff and alike. Member of extreme left party ”interNationalsocialist Party” a subsidiary to british Socialist Workers Party and danish ”Enhedslisten”.

”interNationalsocialist Party” are known for the following (among others):
A party member, Henrich Nielsen, got killed in a bomb incident, must likely when he was working on that bomb at the party office.
Trotskyism.
Supportive to Hezbollah and Hamas and islam in general.
Racistic hate toward jews and israel.

Other links:

http://www.uriasposten.net/archives/23384#comments (contains pictures of Studenterfronten’ associates at work)

http://businessmirror.com.ph/~businfk5/index.php/en/news/economy/32966-danish-embassy-to-reopen-in-manila