Sunday, 6 January 2013
Someone posted this comment on this thread. My response to it is below.
Wake up. If you can't make the simple argument about why Islam violates basic Western human rights - and thus believe "...human rights has to go..." - you're both lost in space and begging to paint the entire counter-jihad movement as actual and real Nazis. It's already bad enough as it is being tagged as "right-wing extremists" the entire time when, in fact, we're trying to preserve Western freedoms, democracy, and actual human rights.

For your information, the vast and enormous difference between those within the counter-jihad movement and those who are actually NAZIS is that we in the counter-jihad movement believe in taking on Islam's disregard for and incompatibility with Western human rights via democratic processes, values, and institutions. Yes, that means we must do a lot of arguing, writing, and convincing. But, if you have any idea of what exactly happened during and after World War II, you should be quite certain that the opposite is NOT an option.

If you want to see a Muslim Europe go ahead and become or act like a Nazi. Go ahead and let the world actually be correct in painting the counter-jihad movement as a Nazi movement. This post-World War II reaction to Hitler and Nazism that continues on even today is a large part of why Western guilt and political correctness have created the immigration policies that have reigned for many decades now.

How to do it then? Stick fully to human rights all around - but - inform minds as to why Islam is dangerous and different and then change laws and procedures as apply to Muslims and descendants of Muslim immigrants. If they don't assimilate; if they commit crimes; if they have more than two kids; if they have more than one wife; if they demand special privileges; if they exclude themselves by their clothing, action, habits, etc - then revoke their (and their family's) legal status and return them to the place they or their parents or grandparents came from. Period.

In doing so, all other human rights will be complied with for them - and for everyone else. Human rights is the only answer. Without sticking to human rights, you become a Nazi and I and many others WILL NOT tolerate a Nazi or a person who does not abide by the human rights enshrined in our Western freedoms. That means, if we follow your suggested path, the counter-jihad movement will be dead, Europe will be split, people like you who believe "...human rights must go..." will be defeated by all means necessary from within and without Europe, and Islam will then without doubt be fully ensured to become the indisputable ideology and religion for the future of Europe. I don't want that. You don't want that.

Learn to make the human rights argument - QUICKLY!!!! If you don't, we are all FINISHED.... Like I said, anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. Nazis will die. Those who believe "...human rights must go..." will become and be seen as Nazis. You and I both know the results of that.

To begin to understand HOW to make the all-important human rights argument in defense of Western freedoms, start with Peter Carl's great articles at The Brussels Journal entitled "Surviving Islamism ... And Right/Left Politics: Churchill's Principle" at:

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/blog/21099

The tone of this comment is striking. Despite his freely casting "Nazi" aspersions around, the poster sounds a lot like a Nazi himself. Or a Muslim. His post distils down to this: "Anyone who doesn't agree with human rights is a Nazi, and Nazis WILL BE destroyed!". This is like a Muslim saying, "Anyone who doesn't worship Allah in the exact manner I specify is a Mushrikun, and all Mushrikun WILL BE destroyed!".

Human rights and democracy are diametrically opposed to one another. Human rights = bureaucracy, not democracy. It is a system that allows elites to overrule the judgement of the people based on ambiguous, simplistic written rules that can be interpreted by unelected people to mean whatever the elites want them to mean. All of the evidence available shows that this system is being used by elites to promote the islamisation and de-Europeanisation of Europe.

The fact that you are still obsessed with a political movement that expired 70 years ago shows how mentally prostrate you are. You have accepted the intellectual framework that the elites have imposed upon you and are unable to articulate your opposition to their policies in any terms other than their own. That fact alone means they have already won. Imagine trying to argue that people should be allowed to have sex outside marriage if you were forced to do it within a conceptual framework based on "sin" handed to you by the medieval Catholic Church. You would have to argue that it wasn't a sin. The correct response is not to argue about whether sex outside marriage is or isn't a sin, but to free your mind from that way of thinking and find a new paradigm instead.

The human rights dogma only became a standard part of our political landscape in the aftermath of WW2, not coincidentally the exact moment at which Europe began its headlong descent into islamisation, repopulation by aliens and, ultimately, civil war. Our countries were relatively free and decent places long before these written rule frameworks were established and the bureaucratic institutions were set up to service them. The freedom and decency of our societies does not proceed from these written rules. It proceeds from the culture of the people. According to your way of thinking, all Europeans born before the human rights dogma established itself were Nazis.

There is not a shred of evidence that the ideology of human rights has played or can play any significantly useful role in challenging the islamisation of Europe, and overwhelming evidence that it is actively facilitating it. Your fantasies about how we can have "good human rights" are like the fantasies of diehard communists who say "real communism hasn't been tried yet". Of course, your proposed deportation plan would be prohibited by the human rights courts. Based on the human rights dogma, non-first generation immigrants would be full citizens with the same entitlements as anyone else. We would be unable to make a legal distinction between them and members of the indigenous population.

You say we will be seen as Nazis. We are seen as Nazis anyway. Organisations like the EDL have been making fools of themselves protesting about how they are human rights organisations. Has it led the establishment to treat them any better? They are vilified just as they would be if they were carrying pictures of Adolf Hitler. It is people like you who are promoting the islamisation of Europe by accepting Establishment thinking rather than challenging it.

14 comments:

sheik yer'mami said...

Quite so.

The Moslems don't respect the Universal Declaration of Human Rights anyway, but they know who to abuse it like a child-wife. And the Cairo concocted declaration of Muslim rights gives us kafirs no rights at all, apart from paying the jiziya, conversion or being annihilated.

The problem begins and ends with the UN which is entirely in the grip of 57 Muslim nations. We need to sink them next to bin Laden and get the hell out of agreements that give rights to savages which they would never grant us.

The 'Nazi' shriekers must not be taken seriously; desperate times demand desperate measures. Self-preservation goes above everything; you can't make omelette without breaking eggs.

But we have a long way to go. From the days of Don Pelayo to the eviction of the moors from Spain it took 700 years.

If we lose this, western culture and civilisation is lost. Not within one generation, within three to four. So you will find many who are prepared to close their eyes and pretend not to see, others will say as long as it doesn't affect me directly I don't care, but it all ends up the same, victory of the barbarians.

sheik yer'mami said...

correction: should read 'they know how to abuse like a child wife'.

Trollman said...

"Human rights" actually means human entitlements and is used to continue to ruin our civilization. By putting the "class struggle" into every possible aspect of peoples lives it has become a war of all against all.

Trollman said...

The only solution to this problem is to outbreed the invaders, and the elites. I can't fathom why this hasn't come up yet. Renaissance, not revolution is the path to victory. Heritage trades, massive families, and the end of the degenerate urban lifestyle. We are in a fight for our very existence. Breed. Fight. Proliferate. The next generations of huge families will have cultural values instead of cosmopolitan ones. The solution is so simple.

Anonymous said...

Delete this comment after you read it.

So I am not sure if you are aware of the TOR network, if you aren't, go here and get it: https://www.torproject.org/

then, once you have that browser, type in this URL: http://hlmrraadkb646464.onion/

It is pretty much a hitlist for everyone involved in opposing multiculturalism, islamic hegemony and the EUSSR. You guys need to report on this somehow, but first study the network on TOR. They also have lists on you guys too, and you should be aware that these sites have just started popping up which means there might be actual hits out on you.

The TOR network is a secure, anonymous network that is untrackable and untraceable to ISP spying. It's also the haven for child porn and black market weapons.

They also put out hit lists on people. Check it out.

Lord Crusader said...

"Imagine trying to argue that people should be allowed to have sex outside marriage if you were forced to do it within a conceptual framework based on "sin" handed to you by the medieval Catholic Church. You would have to argue that it wasn't a sin."

Yes sex outside marriage is a mortal sin. It is the disrigard for marriage, life of the unborn, traditional values and the Church which have put the Western World in this mess. You sound like a typical Catholic bashing marxist socialist liberal. Please read these Catholic prophecies about a Muslim invasion of Europe it was made in 1959. http://www.realclearreligion.com/index_files/581ccd78a0ceb821ce53388949fd2d62-284.html

and
http://www.catholicprophecy.info/muslim.html

I am sorry if I offended you but I can't let the Church be mocked and disregarded.

Anonymous said...

I am sorry if I offended you but I can't let the Church be mocked and disregarded.

Quite.

Enough of church bashing. Leftists trash our heritage. In their malign ignorance they do not realise that Western civilisation is a consequence of Christianity. Bashing the church is thus bashing our heritage.

DP111

Anonymous said...

DP111

Human Rights are based on the principle that all humans are equal. All humans have equal rights to everything.



I love the smell of gunpowder and bacon in the morning.

Anonymous said...

DP111

Damn HTML didnt come out right.

Human Rights are based on the principle that all humans are equal. All humans have equal rights to everything.

But some humans are more equal then others.

I love the smell of gunpowder and bacon in the morning.

Anonymous said...

Worth reading

Tolerance, safety and freedom are not the same as equality, however, and equality is the freight that liberals seek to smuggle into arguments via “rights talk.” Gay activists do not construe their “rights” in terms of liberty, but in terms of radical and absolute equality. They insist that same-sex relationships are identical to — entirely analogous to and fungible with — traditional marriage.

http://spectator.org/archives/2008/11/17/gay-rights-gay-rage/print

The article is about 2gay rights" and legalised gay marriages, but the the whole issue if "rights" as such is the target.

As the article points out

Last week’s news from California was, in some sense, a vindication of Moore’s view. The antinomian rage of the activists — who reportedly defaced houses of worship and mailed mysterious white powders to a religious fraternity — is an inevitable result of America’s attempt to substitute “rights talk” for faith in the Creator. And what Justice Kennedy called our “emerging awareness” looks more and more like encroaching darkness.

Maria José said...

Indian mother jailed in Britain for killing son who 'failed to memorise Quran'

London: An Indian-origin mother, who beat her 7-year-old son to death ‘like a dog’ for failing to memorise the Quran, was on Monday sentenced to life for killing him and setting his body afire to hide evidence after applying barbeque gel.

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/130107/news-crime/article/indian-mother-jailed-britain-killing-son-who-failed-memorise-quran

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2013/01/07/sara-ege-sentenced-to-for-killing-her-son-yaseen-91466-32558851/

Anonymous said...

I should have posted my answer to the "human rights activist" perhaps under this post, but now it is under the original post!

Please look there if you are that activist or just an interested reader.

Anonymous said...

Instead of saying you are against "human rights" say you are against "human rights fundamentalism" which will be harder for the human rights fundamentalists to refute. You can argue that the concept is good but that people have carried it to harmful extremes that harm society, such as the Abu Qatada case.

That will get people used to thinking that human rights is not some sacred phrase that must never be challenged.

Aiman Bachao said...

Very Best Website about Islam and humanity....

Aiman Bachao

Diversity Macht Frei

Iostream

Share It

Search

Loading...

Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews