Thursday, 30 June 2011

Source: Jihadwatch
This is a translation of an article that appeared originally in the German Die Welt newspaper. The German President caused controversy last year with his remark that "Islam Belongs to Germany". Of course, the way things are going, in a few decades it will be the other way around: Germany belongs to Islam.

Ideology of Power
by Josef Lödin (translated by JLH)

Islam, as an ideology does not belong to Europe. It is not willing to regard religion, society and politics separately. Freedom, nucleus of the European Enlightenment, is alien to it.

Everyone — regardless of race or religion — can feel at home in Europe, provided he accepts and internalizes the essential values of European civilization. They were fought for and won in difficult battles between state and religion, individual and society, philosophy, science, art and faith. The nucleus of European Enlightenment is the freedom of the individual. This freedom is the greatest of possessions; with it comes questioning tradition, choosing a life different from that prescribed by the collective. This freedom was often paid for with one’s life. People allowed themselves to be burned at the stake, accepted torture, persecution, murder. We know that “spiritual progress” (Freud) is not a one-way street; that retreats in our European Enlightenment were often more powerful than advances; that barbarism was always and everywhere a reality. Nonetheless, the world will not get around the idea of freedom. And Islam too will founder on this idea. As Europeans, we are not prepared to give up our idea of freedom.

We are not talking about the individual who comes from Islamic culture and wants to be a Muslim, but about Islam as a philosophy and “idea of civilization.” Islam does not belong in Europe because it does not wish to regard religion, culture, society and politics as separate, but decisively wants to support its own unity. This mindset is not unknown to Europe. Both Judaism and Christianity are acquainted with this idea of unity under the banner of a faith. All religions would like have the effect of building civilization, but, in an arduous battle, Europe has distanced itself from the idea of omnipotence in religion.

Islam does not belong in Europe, because in this respect it is dragging along centuries behind. Because it places faith above science and enlightenment. It knows no Reformation. It has not experienced the battle between philosophy, science and church, for which the church paid by giving up its claim to omnipotence. With all due tolerance to traditional beliefs, European civilization cannot accept the superiority of faith over philosophy, science, art and enlightenment. Above all, Islam does not belong in Europe, despite Ataturk, because it is a stranger to the separation of politics and religion. Islam is in its essence a political theology. It is not by chance that its expansion came with the sword. Islam is an ideology of power. In its developing phase, it was not carried by a tradition of powerlessness, as was Judaism (“We were slaves in Egypt”) and Christianity, which had to defend itself against persecution and repression. Islam, to the contrary, played the part of master of the world from the start. Even though nothing of that is left, the claim has been internalized.

Islam is not European, because it put the collective above the individual, because it is not prepared to defend the individual from the collective, because it disregards the rights of minorities and because — all lip-service to the contrary notwithstanding — it maintains the greater value of the man. The culturally internalized inferiority of the woman has been a reality in Islam for centuries. You have to have a lot of sand in your eyes to justify or deny this. Islam can never be European, because the non-Muslim is an incomplete human being. Islam cannot be part of Europe, because criticizing it is forbidden, because apostasy of a Muslim is punished by death, because heresy is seen as more serious than all crimes against civil law. Islam does not belong in Europe, because it cruelly persecutes sexual minorities and is capable of no effective tolerance.

All these reasons form the causes of the backwardness of the Islamic world — its distaste for science, art and enlightenment. Any Muslim can become a European and practice his religion within European civilization. Because of its archaisms, Islam as an idea of civilization cannot be recognized as a part of Europe. Europe would limit itself; we would bow to the aggressive demand of Islam.

We must distinguish clearly between Islam as a religion and Islam as a civilization. Islam is not content to be a creed, but threatens secular European civilization with an imaginary alternative. Europe must reject this idea of an Islamic civilization. Many Europeans are lulling themselves with illusions, when they do not take Islam's claim to overlordship seriously. The do not understand that this pseudo-idea of a civilization drives millions of Muslims, who want to free the world from our decadence.

In this discussion, Europeans must insist that it is not about religion: everyone can practice that within the framework of the law. The question is: What else does Islam have to offer? What civilization is it suggesting, what legal system, what system of public order, what educational system, what infrastructure, what opera houses, what libraries and hospitals, what answers to ecological questions? Only taking care of these things can claim the name of civilization. Everywhere that Islam has "civilized" in the last 600 years, it has left in its wake poverty, illiteracy and backwardness. In the realm of civilization, Islam has utterly failed. Since the Renaissance, it has dozed through the modern age. Whoever is unable to cope is happy to offer religion as a cure. In this case, religion is not an intellectual-historical heritage, but really just the opium of the people.

The author was born in Afghanistan in 1951 and came to Germany in 1960. Presently, he works in Zurich as a neurologist and psychiatrist. He is active as a psychiatric training analyst in Paris and Berlin.

Source: Gates of Vienna

The 43-year-old assailant was arrested. It is not yet known whether his religious orientation is one of "peace".
The French interior minister recently visited Belleville, an area of Paris where not long ago Chinese immigrants staged a demonstration to protest against the levels of violence and crime. A blogger reports:

Walking around, I meet Xavier, around 30, he has been living in Belleville for 10 years. I ask him if he senses growing tension in the district. "It's always tense here, but it's true that it's more tense than normal. The Chinese are more and more mistrustful and I have the impression that they are folding in on themselves," he says. "Withdrawing into communitarianism?" I ask him. "Well, yes, there's a lot of communitarianism here. People don't hang around much together. The Chinese among themselves, the North Africans too, the blacks as well. And it's a shame that the only interaction between communities takes place via attacks. I say it without racism, you know, but it has to be said you never see an African mama having her necklace grabbed. It's always the same people being attacked and the same people doing the attacking. So, inevitably, that creates an image of community tensions and people withdraw into themselves."

Taxes on petrol and diesel are to be raised in Italy “to confront the urgent humanitarian situation on the national territory produced by the exceptional influx of people from the countries of North Africa”.

The cartoon caption reads: 'To think that in the old days in order to invade a country you had to fight it.'
Source: Novopress
Wednesday, 29 June 2011
I visited Brian Whelan's page where he has more evidence of Hari having engaged in deceitful practices, including lifting quotes from other people's interviews.

On this page, Whelan asks people to help him crowd-check Hari's interview quotes, other than the ones that have already been exposed. One of Hari's interviews was with Malalai Joya, the Afghan women's rights activist and author of the book "Raising My Voice." Whelan had already exposed a "borrowed" quotation in this interview, borrowed in this case from the book's blurb. Presumably Whelan doesn't have the book itself, so can't check the quotes against the main text.

I happen to have an Amazon Kindle version of this book. There is a Counterjihad-themed story behind this. On a forum once, I came across someone who seemed partially steeped in the usual multi-cult philosophy, but also showed some signs of intelligence and an ability to think for himself and lift himself out of it. So I tried to persuade him to read the book "Reflections on the Revolution in Europe" by Christopher Caldwell, to help him on his journey. He eventually agreed to do this on condition that I would read a book he nominated: Raising My Voice by Malalai Joya. I hadn't heard of this person before and didn't particularly want to read it, but thought it might be worth making the sacrifice in the hope of "saving one soul". So I bought a Kindle version of the book and am about half way through it now. It's somewhat interesting in its way, even from a Counterjihad perspective. It shows the extraordinary struggle a rational person has to go through to bring about even a slight improvement in the condition of a country dominated by Islamic evil.

Anyway, since I had an electronic copy of the book, it was quite easy for me to check the quotes. Just copy and paste the quotes from the interview into the Kindle search field. Copy and paste: the same technique Hari apparently uses to put his interviews together. Haha! Here's what the check turned up:

Hari interview:

On many occasions, ordinary men and women – anonymous strangers – helped her out by sending the police charging off in the wrong direction. She adds: "Every day in Afghanistan, even now, hundreds if not thousands of ordinary women act out these small gestures of solidarity with each other. We are our sisters' keepers."

Raising My Voice, by Malalai Joya (location 973 of 4871, 21% of the way through the book, doesn't have proper page reference because it's an electronic copy):

Really, though, there was nothing too unusual about this interaction. Every day in Afghanistan, even now, hundreds if not thousands of ordinary women act out these small gestures of solidarity with each other. By necessity, after decades of brutality, we are our sisters' keepers.

Busted, Hari!

Here's another one:

Hari interview:

When the American invasion began, the Taliban fled her province, but the bombs kept falling. "Many lives were needlessly lost, just like during the September 11 tragedy," she says. "The noise was terrifying, and children covered their ears and screamed and cried. Smoke and dust rose and lingered in the air with every bomb dropped."

Raising My Voice (location 1019 of 4871, 22% of the way through the book):

The next day, US bombers roared over the city and hit the radio and TV station, along with the house of a Gulbuddin Party commander. The noise was terrifying, and children covered their ears and screamed and cried. Smoke and dust rose and lingered in the air with every bomb dropped. Luckily no civilians were killed in these first attacks on Farah, but there were many injuries. And the news reaching us from other parts of Afghanistan was terrible.

Just as many innocents died on September 11th, the initial invasion of Afghanistan also took many blameless lives.

Busted again!

Hari interview:

As soon as the Taliban retreated, they were replaced – by the warlords who had ruled Afghanistan immediately before. Joya says that, at this point, "I realised women's rights had been sold out completely... Most people in the West have been led to believe that the intolerance and brutality towards women in Afghanistan began with the Taliban regime. But this is a lie. Many of the worst atrocities were committed by the fundamentalist mujahedin during the civil war between 1992 and 1996. They introduced the laws oppressing women followed by the Taliban – and now they were marching back to power, backed by the United States. They immediately went back to their old habit of using rape to punish their enemies and reward their fighters."

Raising My Voice, (location 572 of 4871):

Most people in the West have been led to believe that intolerance, brutality and the severe oppression of women in Afghanistan began with the Taliban regime. But this is a lie, more dust in the eyes of the world from the warlords who dominated the American-backed, so-called democratic government of Hamid Karzai. In truth some of the worst atrocities in our recent past were committed during the civil war by the men who are now in power.

Raising My Voice, (location 1067 of 4871):

As the warlords marched back into power, they returned to their old habits of using rape to punish their enemies and reward their fighters.

So he's lifted two quotes here from completely different parts of the book and melded them into one!

Another. Wow.

Hari interview:

She did it anyway, and decided to fight this fundamentalist by running in the election for the Loya jirga ("meeting of the elders") to draw up the new Afghan constitution. There was a great swelling of support for this girl who wanted to build a clinic – and she was elected. "It turned out my mission," she says, "would be to expose the true nature of the jirga from within."

Raising My Voice, (location 1229 of 4871):

I was determined to help put an end to the warlords and fundamentalists, and I knew the great majority of Afghan men and women shared this aim. My mission would be to expose the true nature of the Jirga from within it.

OMG they just keep coming. Most of the quotes seem to be lifted from her book.

Hari interview:

As she stepped past the world's television cameras into the Loya jirga, the first thing Joya saw was "a long row with some of the worst abusers of human rights that our country had ever known – warlords and war criminals and fascists".

Raising My Voice, location 1325:

Most of the nine delegates from my province of Farah were not warlord supporters, although the same could not be said for the representatives of many of the other provinces - especially the northern provinces of Afghanistan, where warlords had full control. Some of them, in fact, were among the worst abusers of human rights that our country had ever known.

Bloody hell. This is getting wearying. There are so many. I have to type out the text from Kindle as it doesn't allow you to copy and paste.

Hari interview:

For a moment, as these old killers started to give long speeches congratulating themselves on the transition to democracy, Joya felt nervous. But then, she says, "I remembered the oppression we face as women in my country, and my nervousness evaporated, replaced by anger."

Raising My Voice, location 1253:

I stood up at the table in front of the room, wondering if my thoughts would be as dry as my mouth. But then I remembered the oppression we face as women in my country, and my nervousness evaporated, replaced by anger.

Hari interview:

"From that moment on," Joya says, "I would never again be safe... For fundamentalists, a women is half a human, meant only to fulfil a man's every wish and lust, and to produce children and toil in the home. They could not believe that a young woman was tearing off their masks in front of the eyes of the Afghan people."

Raising My Voice, location 1461:

For fundamentalists, a woman is half a human, meant only to fulfil a man's every wish and every lust and to produce children and toil in the home. They could not believe that a young girl was tearing off their masks in front of the eyes of the Afghan people.

Hari interview:

She leans forward and quotes Brecht: "He says, 'He who does not know the truth is only a fool. He who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a criminal.'"

Raising My Voice, location 1506:

One of my favourite quotes is by the German writer Bertolt Brecht, from his play the Life of Galileo: 'He who does not know the truth is only a fool. He who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a criminal.'

Conceivably, Joya might well have repeated this quote in the interview with Hari, although at this point does he really deserve the benefit of the doubt?

Hari interview:

She says there is no difference for ordinary Afghans between the Taliban and the equally fundamentalist warlords. "Which groups are labelled 'terrorist' or 'fundamentalist' depends on how useful they are to the goals of the US," she says. "You have two sides who terrorise women, but the anti-American side are 'terrorists' and the pro-American side are 'heroes'."

Raising My Voice, location 4185:

In this hoax of a 'war on terror', which groups are labelled 'terrorist' depends on how useful they are to the goals of the United States. The US calls the Taliban terrorists, but not the warlords who murder and rape innocents to impose their will on the people.

Hari interview:

There has been an epidemic of self-immolation by women across the "new" Afghanistan in the past five years. "The hundreds of Afghan women who set themselves ablaze are not only committing suicide to escape their misery," she says, "they are crying out for justice."

Raising My Voice, location 4368:

The hundreds of Afghan women who set themselves ablaze are not only committing suicide to escape their misery - they are crying out for justice.

Hari interview:

Apologising for her English – which is, in fact, excellent – she quotes Brecht again: "Those who do struggle often fail, but those who do not struggle have already failed."

Raising My Voice, location 2979:

As Brecht says, 'Those who do struggle often fail, but those who do not struggle have already failed.'

Again, it's conceivable that Joya did repeat this quote in the interview.

Hari interview:

She says that it is wrong to say Afghanistan will simply collapse into civil war if that happens. "What about the civil war now? Today, people are being killed – many, many war crimes. The longer the foreign troops stay in Afghanistan doing what they are doing, the worse the eventual civil war will be for the Afghan people."

Raising My Voice, location 4248:

Some people say that when these troops withdraw a civil war will break out. Often this prospect is raised by people who ignore the vicious conflict and humanitarian disaster that is already occurring in Afghanistan. The longer the foreign troops stay in Afghanistan doing what they are doing today, the worse the eventual civil war will be for the Afghan people.

Hari interview:

Many people in Afghanistan were hopeful, she says, about Barack Obama – "but he is actually intensifying the policy of George Bush... I know his election has great symbolic value in terms of the struggle of African-Americans for equal rights, and this struggle is one I admire and respect. But what is important for the world is not whether the President is black or white, but his actions. You can't eat symbolism."

Raising My Voice, location 4123:

Please understand that this is how the President of the United States looks from where the Afghan people are sitting. I know that his election has great symbolic value in terms of the struggle of African-Americans for equal rights, and this struggle is one that I admire and respect. But what is important for the world is not whether the president is black or white, but rather his ideas and his actions. You cannot eat symbolism, and for us Obama will only become a symbol of an unjust war and domination if he continues down the path set out.

Hari interview:

"It's not good to show my enemies any weakness, [but] it's hard to be strong all the time," Joya says with a sigh, as she runs her hands through her hair. She has been speaking so insistently – with such preternatural courage– that it's easy to forget she was just a girl when she was thrust into fighting fundamentalism.

Raising My Voice, location 2413:

Although it is not good to show my enemies any weakness, I am still only a human being. It is hard to be strong all the time.

Wow, I'm glad that's over. I was planning to watch a DVD tonight till I got derailed by this. I would say that probably a majority of the quotes in the "interview" seem to be lifted wholly or partially from Joya's book. In fact, the borrowing is on such an enormous scale that I think we're entitled to wonder whether Hari even met Malalai Joya at all, or did he just make the whole thing up?

It's interesting that Joya is one of the names Hari cites in his partial apologia:

Over the years I have interviewed some people who have messages we desperately need to hear – from Gideon Levy about Israel, to Malalai Joya about Afghanistan, to Gerry Adams about how to end a sectarian war.

Regardless of how worthy these messages may or may not be, there can be no excuse for the kind of gross deceit Hari has displayed. The man is a fraud. He ought to be drummed out of the journalism business for good.


Guy Walters and Jeremy Duns have picked up on this story in the New Statesman and managed to find even more instances of 'borrowing'. Well done to them. They have reproduced the entire text of the article and set out the 'borrowings' in bold. This makes it easier to see just how much of the "interview", assuming there actually was an interview, has been lifted from her book. You can see it here.
The mainstream media today is almost gleefully pouncing on the report about child grooming that reveals that "only" 26% of the perps were "Asian". The Guardian gives us a typical example in its sub-heading:

Director of child exploitation protection warns against jumping to conclusions as findings do not support claims of Asian gangs

We should take a moment to consider how extraordinarily disproportionate this figure of 26% is. Muslims are probably, at most, no more than 5% of the British population. So even according to these highly questionable figures, their involvement in this evil is 5 times greater than would be expected given their share of the population. Despite this, Peter Davies, the head of CEOP, the agency that commissioned this report, is still playing the same old politically correct games:

But Peter Davies, the director of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre (Ceop), which carried out the research, warned against jumping to conclusions on the ethnicity of offenders because the data gathered by his investigators was incomplete, not nationwide and of poor quality.

"I would send a note of caution about trying to extrapolate anything from this. Looking at this issue through the lens of ethnicity does not do the victims any favours," he said.


The assessment was commissioned after national debate over what some people had identified as a pattern of Asian men operating in gangs to groom young white girls and sexually abuse them. Davies said the findings did not support this suggestion.

This is a shameful denial of an obvious truth. The findings clearly do support the suggestion. But these figures almost certainly massively understate the problem, for several reasons. First of all, as the report itself says, the data is incomplete and "ethnicity had not been recorded in 32% of cases".

Second, the report covers the phenomenon of child grooming on the street generally, not specifically group-related activity. This means it includes lots of deviant individuals involved in the activity. It is the phenomenon of group sexual abuse that tends, overwhelmingly, to be a crime committed by ethnic minorities against the ethnic majority. This is true of virtually all forms of group sexual abuse, such as gang rape, for example, not just the sexual grooming of children. I have no doubt that if group-based abuse was separated from individual abuse, the "Asian" element of child grooming would prove to be far, far higher. A figure of 95% would not surprise me.

Third, police ethnicity data in relation to crimes simply cannot be trusted. Under Labour, for reasons of political correctness, the police, rather than making their own assessment of a suspect's race, were instructed to accept the person's own racial self-definition. Muslims, masters of fraud that they are, quickly spotted how they could exploit this foolish flaw in the system. When being booked for an offence, the Muslims would simply describe themselves as "white". The police would know better but would be required to accept it. The advantage for the Muslim, of course, is that the next time he commits a crime, mugging an old woman say, when the victim is describing the perp to the police, she will say he was "Asian". The police then go away and trawl for "Asian" suspects in their database. But the sly Muslim is already in there as "white", so he doesn't show up.
While browsing Johann Hari's website, I typed 'Muslims' into the search field to see what the dishonest little runt had had to say about our mutual friends. An article about the Finsbury Park mosque had some interesting information. It seems that little Johann "studied Islamic philosophy at university".

After 11 September, I was sent by my editor to
insinuate myself into the Finsbury Park mosque and -
if possible - to talk to Abu Hamza. I ended up hanging
around for nearly a week. It is a place notoriously
unfriendly to "infidel" journalists, but I had a few
advantages over the other hacks desperate to find
their way in: I have a vaguely Islamic-sounding name
(in fact, it's Swiss); I studied Islamic philosophy at
university, so I knew more about Muslim politics than
most of the people there; and, because I look about 12
years old, it takes a bit more time for people to
become suspicious of me.

Now we know where the little bastard got his cavalier approach to the truth from. He must have imbibed the concept of 'taqiyya' from his Islamic studies. And as for him looking about 12, he's lucky one of the Mohammedans didn't try to "marry" him on the spot.
The Iranian government is criticising the BBC's decision to broadcast a documentary series about the life of the so-called prophet Muhammad.

Speaking to Iran's semi-official Fars news agency, he said: "The BBC's decision to make a documentary on the life of [the] prophet Muhammad seems dubious and if our suspicions are proved to be correct, we will certainly take serious action."

Hosseini added: "What the enemy is trying to do in ruining the Muslims' sanctity is definitely much more than causing us to react and unfortunately, some Islamic countries are not taking this issue seriously. One way to show objections is to express condemnation of the West over their despicable actions."

However, Iran needn't have worried as the documentary is in the surely reliable Muslim hands of Aaqil Ahmed, head of religion and ethics at the BBC.

The Guardian story provides some interesting details about the upcoming broadcast, however. Apparently no image of the con man Muhammad will be shown, nor will there be any attempt to show scenes from the paedophile prophet's life.

The BBC has also made clear that its series is "in line with Islamic tradition" and "it does not depict any images of the face of Muhammad, or feature dramatic reconstructions of Muhammad's life".

This is outrageous. Why is the BBC pandering to the Muslim dogma that no images of the so-called prophet can be shown? And why is the whole documentary "in line with Islamic tradition"? Are the BBC's documentaries about Christianity "in line with Christian tradition"? Of course not. They are sceptical, challenging, even mocking. The BBC recently offered us 'The Bible's Buried Secrets', which mocked Christianity and Judaism, claimed to debunk the Bible and worked to undermine the state of Israel.

The atheist Francesca Stavrakopoulou definitely seemed to have this prejudiced view of Christians and Jews. She also appeared to have an unwavering admiration for Muslims. Some might wonder whether this had anything to do with the fact that Stavrakopoulou lectures at the University of Exeter, which is now known for its pro-Islamic links, for its European Centre for Palestinian Studies, Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies (funded by the Saudi Prince Turki Al Faisal) and European Muslim Research Centre (funded by the Muslim Brotherhood)!

The premise of last Tuesday's The Bible's Buried Secrets was that King David probably didn't exist. If this was the case, argued Stavrakopoulou, then the modern state of Israel could be severely undermined! She suggested that the founding fathers of Israel used the story of King David merely to justify their re-settlement of Palestine, and therefore any archaeological evidence for the existence of David which had been discovered by Jewish archaeologists was questionable. At one point she even said that Jewish or Christian archaeologists dig "with a trowel in one hand and a Bible in the other"! Stavrakopoulou never for a moment thought that Muslim or atheist scholars might have ulterior motives or agendas - apparently, in BBC-land, these two groups are above any suspicion!

So, under Aaqil Ahmed's tutelage, the BBC now offers programmes that marginalise, challenge and deconstruct Christian and Judaic religious traditions alongside other programmes that respectfully conform to Muslim religious traditions. This is a clear example of the Enemy Within. This is what Muslims do: work to advance the Muslim agenda in small, subtle ways that the average person might not even notice.
MPs on Tuesday voted by 116 to 30 to ban the kosher and halal slaughter of animals despite an emotional debate both in parliament and in society in general.

However, Jewish and Islamic groups which can prove that animals do not suffer more during ritual killing than while being killed in an ordinary slaughterhouse will be able to apply for a permit to continue their traditional practices.

The draft legislation, drawn up by the pro-animal PvdD, still has to be approved by the upper house of parliament before it can become law.

Several MPs voted against the bill on religious grounds, saying that freedom of religion should be more important. They also argue that ritual slaughter does not lead to more suffering for the animals.

Tuesday, 28 June 2011
I couldn't resist doing a Johann Hari parody. His credibility was destroyed for me long before when he published an article on Muslim homophobia in the gay magazine Attitude rather than his main Independent column. He is a despicable coward and deserves all the brickbats.

Hari: What would you say is the cruellest month, T.S?

T.S: April is the cruellest month.

Hari: How would you characterise it?

T.S: Breeding lilacs out of the dead land.

Hari: Does it stir memories for you?

T.S: Mixing memory and desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.

Hari: I bet you're glad the winter's over.

T.S: Winter kept us warm, covering
Earth in forgetful snow, feeding
A little life with dried tubers.

Hari: How about the summer? Down the beach were you?

T.S: Summer surprised us, coming over the Starnbergersee
With a shower of rain; we stopped in the colonnade,
And went on in sunlight, into the Hofgarten,
And drank coffee, and talked for an hour.

Hari: That's nice. Did you write any poetry there?

T.S: Nah, couldn't be bothered.
And it's not just Germany where Weimar conditions are returning. France, too, was racked by political violence in the interwar years. And it's flourishing there again now.

In a capitulation to Islamic supremacists and violent radical Leftists, French and European Union authorities have canceled a free speech rally planned by a coalition of American and European human rights organizations in Strasbourg, the seat of the European Parliament.

The human rights organizations Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) were planning to hold their first-ever transatlantic summit in Strasbourg, France, on July 2.

The SIOA/SIOE summit was dedicated to the defense of the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law – all principles denied by Islamic law.

SIOA Executive Director Pamela Geller said in a statement: “The Strasbourg police could not guarantee our safety. When the thugs of the Antifa group and Islamic supremacist organizations announced plans to hold a violent counter-demonstration and to do everything they could to disrupt our activities, the authorities canceled permission for our demonstration and conference, instead of standing up to these violent neo-fascists and their Islamic supremacist allies.”

Strasbourg authorities told SIOA and SIOE organizers that they could not guaranteee their safety at the conference and demonstration location, the Place de la Republique. Efforts were made to hold the demonstration nearby, but the authorities still considered security to be too much of an issue.

More on Jihadwatch

In the Weimar Republic, the name given to the political order that prevailed in Germany during the interwar period prior to Hitler's assumption of power, political violence became routine. Along with hyperinflation, this was one of the key destabilising factors that created the impression in the popular mind of the country's descent into chaos. In response, people sought the firm re-establishment of order, with consequences that we now know to be disastrous.

It seems that similar conditions are developing in present day Germany. Leftist/Muslim (it becomes increasingly hard to distinguish the two) violence against those who dissent from politically correct thinking is no longer exceptional. It has become an almost daily occurrence.

Last weekend in Germany, four of the far-right (and this one actually is far right) NPD party's 10 candidates for the upcoming Berlin elections were beaten up by and robbed by masked attackers. Ironically, among the items stolen from one candidate was a book called "Antifa heisst Angriff" (Antifa Means Attack).

On the Friday before the weekend, a group of citizens in Mönchengladbach had gathered to picket an illegal mosque that had been established in Eichen. As the Mohammedans emerged from their Friday prayers, they first remonstrated with the demonstrators verbally then attacked them physically.

A few weeks ago, a leftist/Muslim mob attacked the Counterjihad event attended by Robert Spencer in Stuttgart. Many of the planned activities had to be called off as the police proved unable or unwilling to deal with the violence. A small pro-Israel demonstration had to be called off in the same city due to threats. Only days ago a similar mob, almost certainly involving many of the same people, invaded a construction site where a railway station is due to be built and attacked the police when challenged. One policeman was repeatedly struck while lying on the ground. He was badly injured.

In recent weeks the new Freiheit (Freedom) party, which is affiliated with Geert Wilders' PVV, has been establishing regional branches in the various German states. Numerous violent incidents have been recorded. In one, a Freiheit party stall was overturned and a Freiheit member was attacked and injured.

The PRO movement is another part of the growing Counterjihad mobilisation in Germany. Originating as PRO-Cologne, a group formed spontaneously to protest against plans to build a mosque, it has since spread to other parts of the country and presented candidates for election. Several candidates from the PRO-Deutschland movement were due to speak at a commemoration event on 17 June, a day on which the victims of Communism are traditionally remembered. It was on 17 June 1953 that the people of East Berlin rose up against the Communist dictatorship, only to be butchered en masse by Soviet tanks and army divisions. The left still operates in the same way today. On 17 June 2011, leftist militants using knuckle-dusters attacked those attending the event. Two PRO-Deutschland candidates were badly hurt and required medical treatment. The picture above shows one of them. When police intervened against the leftists, they, too, were attacked.

All shall be well, however. The newly installed Socialist-Green government in the German state of North-Rhine Westphalia recently promised to set up advice centres for the victims of "right-wing" violence.
Monday, 27 June 2011

Jack Straw has an article (£) in the times today about the insurance scams that are driving up vehicle insurance premiums in Britain by 30-40% per year. Straw notes that his own constituency - in Blackburn, Lancashire - is one of the hotspots of this activity. He doesn't speculate about why that might be. Of course the reason is that these scams are almost entirely perpetrated by Muslims and that Straw's constitutency is one of the most islamified parts of Britain.

The number of registered claims management companies has doubled to 3,400 in two years. Their high-pressure sales techniques have led to a phenomenal growth in the number and value of claims for personal injury. The cost of personal injury claims has doubled in ten years, from £7 billion to £14 billion. ABI analysis shows a direct link between the number of claims companies in a region and the level of claims. In the North West, with a high density of claims companies, 40 per cent of claims have a “bodily injury component”, compared with 25 per cent across the country — yet the region’s roads are no less safe.

This is against the backdrop of improving road safety generally, and a reduced incidence of theft.

In 2009 the number of road accidents involving personal injury was 31 per cent down from the average for 1994-98. Improvements in car safety mean that where there is an accident the risk of being badly injured has dropped significantly. Thefts of and from vehicles have also slumped — down by almost three quarters (72 per cent) between 1995 and 2010. Meanwhile, premiums have shot up by at least 30 per cent in the past year and in some urban areas by even more. Yet most motor insurers are still operating at a loss.

Neither the Times, in their ancillary articles, nor Jack Straw himself mention the Muslim factor, not even through the usual euphemism of "Asian". It is all a sinister conspiracy between the insurance companies, legal firms and even the police, they say. Their response is to call for a ban on referral fees.

Calling for a halt to Muslim immigration or even for Muslim repatriation would be a more effective solution to this problem. To make the Muslim connection clear, I have reproduced the composite graphic that shows the incidence of car crash fraud alongside a map showing the extent of Muslim colonisation in different parts of the country.

The figures quoted in Jack Straw's Times article show that the increase in claims is pretty much proportionate with the increase in the Muslim population:
According to a report by the transport committee, personal injury claims have soared by 70 per cent, from an average of just under 400,000 between 2000 and 2005, to 675,000 in 2009-10.

Note these weren't soldiers, just ordinary Europeans being buried in Amersfoort in the Netherlands. "One less dog!" shout the Muslims, as they gleefully disrupt the funeral.
Sunday, 26 June 2011
Children aged 11 to 18 growing up under the Coalition government are concerned about immigration, sceptical about the European Union and favour cutting taxes.


The findings of the poll of 2,000 children give an insight into the attitudes of young people, many of whom will have the vote by the time of the next election, planned for 2015.

Asked how various things a Government could do would affect their own chances of achieving their ambitions:

More than half said that cutting immigration would help their chances;

More felt they would gain from a cut in welfare benefits than from a reduction in carbon emissions;

The majority of those who expressed a view said they would do better if Britain withdrew from the EU, yet one in five sees their own future working abroad.

The Observer has an article on Marine Le Pen today, which includes an interview with her.

The advances made by the Front National and other parties in Europe today – the Swiss People's Party, the Northern League in Italy, Geert Wilders's Freedom Party in the Netherlands – are all based on the combination of anti-immigrant stances plus economic populism and national patriotism. Mainstream parties across Europe have not found answers to this movement, for which the term "far right" seems increasingly inadequate.

"We could be looking at a great realignment of the political positions in Europe," says Bouvet. "It's a new populism. Marine Le Pen could lead it."
Maurice Glasman is being hailed in some quarters as the guru who can help Labour win back the trust of the people on issues like immigration, notwithstanding the fact that he supports an amnesty for illegal immigrants. Doesn't his vision of "Blue Labour" sound a lot like Islam, though? The Mail describes his book as follows:

It includes a glowing passage about the benefits of a ‘patriarchal social order’, including ‘the reproduction of family and social relations, status hierarchies and moral values’. The piece concludes provocatively: ‘This patrimony has now been fragmented and disrupted by .  .  . the growing independence of women.’

A report just published in Belgium shows that 72% of asylum seekers who initially claimed to be minors later admitted to being adults when subjected to a test.

Saturday, 25 June 2011

Reasonably-minded politicians are so rare that it's always good to find one more of them. Step forward Paul Nuttall, UKIP MEP for the North-West of England. Shown here speaking on Russia Today about the outcome of the Geert Wilders trial, he expresses support for Geert Wilders and denounces multi-culturalism.

If UKIP representatives would say things like this more often and more publicly, they'd be a lot higher in the polls than they are now. I doubt Nuttall himself would be suitable as a leader of UKIP much less a British Geert Wilders, though. He doesn't have a very prime ministerial bearing and his thick regional (Geordie?) accent would be off-putting to some voters. It's sad that success in politics is often based on shallow, superficial perceptions, but that's the way the world is.
Ahmet Hamidi, vice-president of the Islamic Faith Community in Austria (Islamischen Glaubensgemeinschaft in Österreich - IGGiÖ), has resigned his office after a furore provoked by a remark he made in Vienna last week. In a discussion which focused on complaints from Muslim parents about their daughters' sport lessons in schools, Hamidi said that "too much sport is not good for the female organism".

The remark sparked outrage and ended with Hamidi voluntarily choosing to leave his post as vice-president of the IGGiÖ. Hamidi has other significant positions, too, though. He is an inspector of religious instruction in state schools and a practising doctor with his own surgery in Vienna.

The State Medical Council declared that there was "no scientific evidence" to support his opinions and consideration is now being given to initiating a professional disciplinary procedure against him. Some members of the Vienna Inspectorate of Schools are also calling for him to resign his position there.
Friday, 24 June 2011

In 376 the Roman emperor Valens allowed Gothic immigrants to cross into the territory of the Roman empire. He had made careful agreements with them, imposing various conditions on their passage, for example that they would adopt Christianity and so forth. Despite this, the whole experience very quickly began to go sour. Two years later, the Emperor Valens was killed at Adrianople fighting the immigrants he had let in. The Goths then proceeded to cause havoc throughout Italy over the new few decades, even sacking Rome itself in 410, something that would have seemed incredible not long before. In 476, exactly one hundred years after the immigrants had been allowed in, their descendants brought the Roman empire to an end.

The parallels with contemporary Europe are obvious. Since third-world immigrants began to be admitted in large numbers in the 1950s and 60s, they have caused absolute havoc for indigenous Europeans, creating hostile, high-crime environments in most major cities, conjuring massive national security threats through terrorist activities and extra-territorial loyalties. (Let's not forget our presence in Afghanistan has been justified by the need to shut down terrorist training camps there, camps that would be attended by Muslims who were born in Britain so they could learn how to murder indigenous Britons more effectively.) Unless tumultuous political change occurs, the indigenous people of Britain are expected to become a minority in their own country sometime this century, and the pattern repeats itself elsewhere in Europe. So 100 years is about how long it will take for us too after the fatal decision to allow in immigrants was made.

[Incidentally, I thought I had made a post about this before but it doesn't seem to be on the site any longer. I'm worried Google might be losing posts.]

The obvious conclusion to draw from this would be: Don't let large numbers of foreigners into your country. The Guardian, however, contrives to draw another conclusion: be nice to refugees!

If there was one lesson that we might learn from Adrianople, it is that although it can never be guaranteed that generous treatment towards those who put themselves under our protection will ever be reciprocated, ungenerous behaviour can be absolutely guaranteed to breed bitterness, resentment and ultimately disaster. It is lesson that we would do well to heed.

It is clear that Europe is being demographically conquered by Muslims. In most European countries, however, the military continues to be dominated by the indigenes. We can hope when the crunch comes, and of course it will, the military will do the right thing and side with their own people against the invaders. It seems that France may have made a fatal mistake, however, in allowing significant penetration of its military by the Mohammedans.

This is a translation of a post on, which is just a series of quotes from various articles and reports. All the quotes are given there with links to their original sources.

This is shocking stuff. I didn't know there had been a Muslim rebellion on a French aircraft carrier!

• And if there was a conflict between France and Algeria ? Aïcha, dressed in army clothes, cannot imagine making war against his own people: “In my head, I am Algerian, I don’t feel French. For me, the army is not about standing up for a nation, it’s about finding a job.”

• A Defence Ministry report from January 2007 mentions “the intransigent and demanding attitude turning to provocation” of the JFOM (jeunes Français d’origine maghrébine) [Young Frenchmen of North African Origin] and the “super-delinquency even at the heart of their regiment.”

• A young French parachute officer recounts how, in his unit, the JFOM (jeunes Français d’origine maghrébine) spend their days in the barracks drinking beer while watching porno films and on the slightest remark, they make a complaint to the commanding officer denouncing the racism of the officer who, summoned by the colonel, is obliged to withdraw the disciplinary measure.

• A Saint-Cyr[French military academy], consideration is being given to putting in place a system inspired by that of Sciences-Po [elite French university for the governing class] and its agreements with schools in priority education zones. “The aim is to one day be be able to call a general Ben Babrouf or a Colonel Mohammed”

• In the navy, the officers will not quickly forget the 1999 mutiny on board the aircraft carrier Foch. Sixty volunteer soldiers, all with North-African parents, took their officer hostage. After being entrenched for 2 days in the aircraft carrier’s cafeteria, they had to be dislodged by a marine commando team. These “North Africans” were reacting to a collective punishment imposed after a rebellion that occurred during a mission off the coast of Yugoslavia during which Super-Etendards had carried out strikes on Kosovo, which the Muslim recruits considered a Muslim sanctuary.

• The young “Frenchmen” of North African origin are responsible for 3.5 times more desertions, 6 times more refusals to obey an order, 6 times more insults to a superior officer and 8 times more acts of insubordination.

• The head Muslim chaplain in the French military is organising the next pilgrimage to Mecca for about forty soldiers and a team of chaplains. The project is close to his heart.


Warsi, 40, whose father arrived in Britain from Pakistan in 1960, will address a meeting of OIC foreign ministers next week in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan.

What a disgrace. We are now effectively part of the OIC. The OIC has a very disturbing track record of anti-semitism and calling for censorship of any criticism of Islam, among other things. Read more about the OIC's background here. A British government should not be endorsing it by participating in it. Thanks to Warsi's influence, it seems we now have a permanent representative to the OIC.

Warsi travels to Astana after she met Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary general of the OIC, during a visit to its secretariat in Jeddah last year while she was in Saudi Arabia for the hajj. This led to the appointment of Britain's first special representative to the 57-strong group. "This is an organisation which is good to engage with and have much deeper engagement with but clearly that relationship didn't appear to be there twelve months ago," Warsi said.

Ihsanoglu recently raised concerns about Islamophobia with Warsi, who caused some controversy in January by saying this had "crossed the threshold of middle-class respectability". They had both agreed that Britain has a better track record than other European countries.

Oh well done, British government. You get a pat on the head from the OIC. You've kept those frothing islamophobes down. Great job on arresting the Koran burners.

Warsi goes on to claim, ludicrously, although less ludicrously with each passing year, that Britain embodies Islamic values.
Warsi said she had also raised concerns about the treatment of minorities in Pakistan. Shahbaz Bhatti, Pakistan's only Christian minister, was shot dead in March after he called for the reform of blasphemy laws that impose the death sentence for insulting Islam.

Warsi said: "I said to them ... let me talk to you about the rights of minorities, the protection of women and the concept of meritocracy. I gave real examples of how Islam embodies all of those values, and the question I put was: my country wasn't formed in the name of Islam, but yours was; so why does my country embody the values of the faith that your country was formed on the basis of?"

Of course this claim is preposterous in many respects, not the least of which is her reference to Britain as 'my country'.

It seems Warsi has been making a lot of trips of this type. Am I the only one who wonders why she's doing this? Isn't she supposed to be the chairwoman of the Conservative party? What the hell does being the chairwoman of the Conservative party have to do with all this diplomatic activity?

Since appointment to the cabinet Warsi has visited Muslim countries, including Kuwait and Pakistan on four occasions. She played an important role in smoothing relations with Pakistan after David Cameron caused great offence last July when he said in India that elements of the Pakistan state were guilty of exporting terrorism.

"I don't believe in this clash of civilisations, where there is the west and the Muslim world," she said. "I mean, if I did, where would I fit in?"

Good question, dear, the answer to which stares remorselessly into your chubby and repulsive face.

For the Mohammedans and their leftist friends, the Not Guilty verdict in the Geert Wilders trial is not the end of the matter. They're planning to appeal the verdict internationally. The Scotsman reports:

Farid Azarkan of the SMN association of Moroccans in the Netherlands said he feared the acquittal could encourage others to repeat Wilders' comments.

"You see that people feel more and more supported in saying that minorities are good for nothing," Mr Azarkan said.


Minorities groups said they would now take the case to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, arguing the ruling meant the Netherlands had failed to protect ethnic minorities from discrimination.

The Dutch News reports:

Lawyer Gerard Spong, one of the first people to accuse Wilders of incitement to hatred was disappointed. ‘We are thinking of going to the European Court. I think Wilders went too far. I was surprised and shocked when he said at the end of the trial that he had meant to be rude and insulting. That is an admission in itself. If he had said that during the trial he would have been convicted. By acquitting him the judges have paved the way to making Muslims second rate citizen.’ Spong called the judge’s comment that Wilders has remained within the context of public debate ‘vague and meaningless’.


The AD writes that the organisations behind Wilders’ prosecution will be turning to the human rights committee of the United Nations. Their lawyer Ties Prakken is quoted as saying that ‘the verdict has damaged the right of minorities to be protected from hatemongering’. One of the organisations, the Beweging to Herstel van het Respect (movement to bring back respect) said: ‘The court has effectively given Wilders permission to turn his threats into action and refuse Muslims to enter the country, forbid the reading of the Koran in the Netherlands and put a stop to building more mosques.’ It has announced it will take the state to court in order to bring about ‘effective measures’ to prevent Wilders from carrying out the alleged threats.
This is totally insane. We are spending £200 million per year on round-the-clock surveillance of 12 Mohammedan terrorists who are considered extremely dangerous but cannot be convicted because of the lack of hard evidence against them.

MI5 and the police will have to spend up to £18 million keeping track of each of the terrorist suspects released under the relaxed control-order system.

The cost is up to ten times higher than the previous system which effectively put those suspected of considering terrorist acts under house arrest.

The new watered-down system allows the 12 people subject to control orders far more freedom as they are only required to be at a designated address overnight.

However, the new system means that up to 60 police officers and MI5 intelligence agents are required to monitor each person. The total costs could reach more than £200 million annually.

The figures have emerged after Lord Carlile, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, was cross-examined by senior Labour MPs over the new system.

He said that the estimated cost of enforcing the new control orders was between £11 and £18 million per person, per year.

“An estimate I was given in the past two years was that you would need 60 whole-time equivalents for 24/7 surveillance of an individual, because you have to cover shifts, sickness and the rest of it,” Lord Carlile said.

Thursday, 23 June 2011
Mohammedans in France are outraged about the upcoming Counterjihad conference in Strasbourg. On their sites and, they say that Strasbourg, "which has been the scene of numerous Islamophobic acts and attacks" will play host to "the wildest detractors of Islam". Among these are Geert Wilders, "the frenzied leader of the Dutch far right, who has sworn allegiance to Netanyahu" and the American "pasionaria" Pamela Geller, "who campaigns against the Ground Zero mosque project while leading a crusade against Campbells halal soup".

Contact details for the Strasbourg city council are provided so that Muslims can agitate to try and get the event banned.

"Closed" Asian communities are hampering investigations into child sexual exploitation, the children's minister, Tim Loughton, has warned.

He claimed that a combination of political correctness and racial sensitivities have kept cases of child sex grooming by Asian gangs "under the radar".

Mr Loughton made the comments in an interview for the BBC Politics Show in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, which has been investigating claims that girls as young as 12 have been targeted by organised Asian gangs.

He said: "In many cases we are dealing with some closed communities. Closed in terms of things being able to go on under the radar and away from the public glare. I think that political correctness and racial sensitivities have in the past been an issue.

"I want to send out a message loud and clear that although we have to be aware of certain characteristics of various ethnic communities and be sensitive as to how we deal with them, a BME (Black Minority Ethnic) tag is not an excuse for us not to investigate vigorously any abuse that may be going on."

I think it is helpful to think of Islam as being a kind of borderless nationalism. The empathy Muslims display towards Muslims living in other countries is exactly like the kind of empathy non-Muslims normally display towards the fellow citizens of their own countries. The Arabic word Ummah - typically used to refer to the community of Muslim believers worldwide - in fact means 'nation'. Koran 3:110 says:

You are the best nation produced [as an example] for mankind.

This is why Islam causes so many problems. Because the world is organised around the nation state paradigm. Many of our legal and social norms are based around that paradigm and the expectation that it is accepted by everyone. Various utopian movements, like communism, have challenged that paradigm but have not been able to display the enduring force and emotional pull of traditional nationalism. Islam has.

Part of the explanation for why Islam has been able to do this may lie in the territorial imperative that is deeply ingrained in Islam. In contrast to Christianity, whose doctrines disavow state power ("Give to Caesar what is Caesar's"), Islam explicitly seeks territorial aggrandisement and control. The purpose of jihad is to establish Shariah rule, in other words to bring new territory under Islamic control. The world is divided into the House of Islam, where Shariah prevails, and the House of War, where it does not prevail yet. Muslims believe it is only a matter of time before Islam prevails in any one specific locale and indeed all over the earth. So, although, Islam may seem to be divorced from the nation state paradigm and the emotional attachment to place on which it is grounded, it is not really. It is just that Muslims have a larger conception of the space that is theirs; it is the whole planet. And all they have to do, they believe, is fight us, outbreed us and wait until they inherit it.

This is why there is no such thing as a British Muslim, or a French Muslim or a German Muslim, and why there can never be. Muslims are already citizens of another country - the Ummah - albeit one that has no clearly defined borders. As the world comes to terms with the threat Islam poses to the rest of the human race, I believe this understanding should be part of the solution. Muslims should be formally stripped of the citizenship of whatever country they are living in or whose passport they hold and legally classified as citizens of the Ummah instead, a non-physical country.

This legal distinction will make it easier to give Muslims the special attention they deserve, for example in airport checks. Countries will naturally want to place special restrictions on citizens of the Ummah. Since the proposal accords with Islamic doctrine itself, it could even be presented as a pro-Muslim gesture; some of the radical Muslim outfits may even support it.
Scepticism, disquiet and asking awkward questions to be phased out.

Detach yourself from history. Never mind the accumulated wisdom of our great men or the struggles and sacrifices of our ancestors. Forget the Age of Reason. Forget Democracy. The multi culti wet dream will be injected into your brain stem, bypassing the basic survival mechanism, countermanding the recognition, before it's knowledge, that your head will leave your shoulders NOW, if you don't MOVE.

The idealogue is now in ascendency. Their plans branch out into the future, regulating all innovation and creativity. The agenda is immutable. The Party is now the nexus of all that can be imagined. All leads to it and all from it.

From the 2010 Annual Report on ECRI's Activities, as reported at ANSAmed* website 16th June:

"Racism has become widespread, consolidated and 'legitimised' in Europe, fostered by the rise of extreme right-wing parties and referendums on religious minorities and foreigners. This is an synthesis of the alarm raised by the Council of Europe in the commission's report against racism and intolerance published today. According to the ECRI commission document, in 2010 racist and intolerant speech and behaviours ceased definitively to be solely the domain of extremist and marginal groups in European societies. Over the past year growing electoral success was achieved by extreme right-wing parties in many European states, accompanied by an ever more frequent use of xenophobic arguments by political leaders and a worrisome increase in referendums against religious minorities and foreigners. Faced with this legitimisation of intolerance and racism aimed at minorities, whether the latter be the Roma ethnic group, immigrants, or Muslim, ECRI says that the current laws prohibiting ''hate speech'' are no longer adequate. According to the Council of Europe body, members of parliament must take on a clear ethical code which makes it ''impossible'' to make use of racist speech, and that all parties and politicians voluntarily sign a document obliging them to adhere to ''good practices''. ECRI has also warned of the danger inherent in the ever-more widespread speeches based on the idea that some communities are so different form each other that they cannot live together.

''This ideology,'' reports ECRI, ''threatens social cohesion as much as the ideology based on racial superiority.''

The whole crazy, mixed up thing can be read here:

So, there you have it. If you happen to be of the opinion that importing islam en-masse into Europe is the height of political folly, the crassest act of civilizational self negation EVER; well you'd better put a sock in it. Those thoughts are waycist! Shake hands with the imam. Whoops, left hand! Reach over the abyss for a group hug with the abysmal..

No expression of concern with islams self declared aim of conquering Europe, or it's disinclination to follow the norms of British and European society will be allowed. Don't offer counter criticism of islams avowed contempt for our civilization. Oh no. Call the cops.

The EU (shouldn't we just call it The Party?)via it's ECRI quango is proposing a ramping up of sanctions (2 years in prison, hefty fine, career ruin. Is it enough?) and a redoubling of individual member states efforts to counter ghastly ethno-centrism. It calls, despite the cuts, for the protection of 'the budgets of national specialised bodies to combat racism and racial discrimination.' So, Sir Trev, your job is safe, you may continue helping the natives adjust to their disinheritance.

My disinclination to follow the morons lining the suits of The Party's self selected oligarchy is total.

Legitimate (for now) political parties, with real things to say about real problems are going to have a tough time ahead. The report laments:

"...racism and intolerance are no longer limited to the fringes of society. This is evidenced by the electoral success of extreme right-wing parties in a number of
member States in 2010; the holding, on a worryingly regular basis, of referenda targeting non-citizens and religious minorities and, unfortunately, their outcome; and the increasing use of xenophobic and anti-Muslim arguments by mainstream political leaders. Legal means alone do not seem sufficient to counter this trend."

Bloody populists, dread demos, deplorable plebs. The career nazi hunters of Searchlight have it made. Gift more grants to the flash mobs of antifa. Squats in the best part of town. Cellars full of cider. The pick of the litter. The finest string.

Being clued up about the true nature of islam, the totality of it's miserable history and it's devastating implications for all of us is no use, bureaucrats want to limit political discourse and tolerance will be enforced. You will bow to liberal dogma. No diversity of opinion can be allowed in diverse Europe.

"As ECRI has repeatedly stated, integration is a twoway process, based on mutual recognition, which bears no relation to assimilation. That migrants and persons with a migration background feel empowered to make certain demands related to the preservation of distinct group identities is a sign of successful integration. Many of these demands must be accepted because they are in
accordance with the law, while others can be reasonably accommodated. Dealing with the majority’s reactions, which sometimes take the form of racism and intolerance, should be seen as part of democratic States’ responsibilities."

If you are of the opinion that Europe is being colonized by islam, shut it. That thought is proscribed. A free pass has been given to the Submitters who have our capital cities, our regional centres and seats on the legislature. It is an enabling bill for our own decapitation. Our consciences and our attachment to who we are; now to be offered up for sacrifice, by our usurpers to the colonists, who in turn will usurp. You may not detach the pincers from your skull. The barb in your thigh stays. You may not extract the poison. Let the gangrene run it's course.

Bureaucracy has a tin ear, backs losers, has no spirit, paves over beauty, rewards failure and is impressed by charlatans. It will cave in to bullying Sandsters and allow ingress of plague into Europe's bloodstream while feeding stumpy revenants moats from the eyes of toddlers denounced by nursery nurses with a Level 1 Pass in Hitler Spotting.

Europe's swine will be deported to China before our masters wake up to their mistakes and by then our Grand Edifices will be replaced with puny follies. Monuments to the Fallen will be hollowed out and filled with hair and nail clippings, Superstar Muezzin will be in it's 10th year on al BBC and sand will flow from our taps.

*ANSAmed - EuroMed - Eurabia

THE HAGUE, 23/06/11 - There will be no ban on the unanaesthetised slaughter of animals that is carried out in Jewish and Islamic abattoirs. The Lower House majority that earlier existed for such a ban has evaporated.

The Lower House wants unanaesthetised ritual slaughter to remain possible after all, providing Jews and Muslims can show that this does not cause more suffering for animals than anaesthetised slaughter. Labour (PvdA) and centre-left D66 have received support from the conservatives (VVD) and leftwing Greens (GroenLinks) for a plan giving the abattoirs a year and a half to demonstrate that their method of slaughter is animal-friendly. If they do not succeed, then there could be a ban after all.

PvdA and D66 did earlier back a proposed bill from the Party for Animals (PvdD) on a ban of unanaesthetised slaughter. But under pressure from their Islamic supporters, both parties went back on this.

The VVD also began to have doubts. Its honorary member and former party leader Frits Bolkestein vehemently opposed the PvdD proposal, defending the Jewish tradition.

The Christian parties CDA, ChristenUnie and SGP also put forward an amendment to the PvdA bill yesterday. Under this amendment, unanaesthetised ritual slaughter would be banned unless a licence had been awarded for this.

CDA, ChristenUnie and SGP want abattoirs to be able to obtain a licence if the slaughtering process is under the constant supervision of a vet. Additionally, the animal has to have lost consciousness 45 seconds at most after having its throat cut. The vet can still stun the animal if he finds animal welfare is being damaged.

More than a quarter of primary school children are from an ethnic minority – an increase of almost half a million since 1997, it emerged yesterday.

The Government’s annual school census painted a picture of a changing Britain where schools are under mounting pressure from mass immigration.

In some areas, only 8 per cent of primary pupils are from a white British background. Nearly one million children aged five to 16 – 957,490 – speak English as a second language, up from almost 800,000 five years ago.

And 26.5 per cent of primary pupils – 862,735 – are from an ethnic minority. When Labour took office in 1997, the total was 380,954. At secondary level, the total of ethnic minority children – 723,605 – has risen from 17.7 per cent to 22.2 per cent in five years.

The biggest group of ethnic minority pupils were Asians, making up 10 per cent of primary pupils and 8.3 per cent of secondary pupils.


Dutch Politician Cleared Over Hate Speech
A Dutch court has acquitted anti-Islam politician Geert Wilders of hate speech and discrimination charges.

Geert Wilders says he is "incredibly happy" after being cleared of all charges
The far-right MP was facing five counts of inciting hatred among Muslims following his controversial statements attacking Islam, which he compared to Nazism.

But the court ruled that his comments, while offensive to many Muslims, fell within the bounds of legitimate political debate and cleared him of all charges.

Presiding judge Marcel van Oosten said Wilders' public claims must be seen in a wider context of debate over immigration policy.

It's not only an acquittal for me, but a victory for freedom of expression in the Netherlands.

Outside the courtroom, Mr Wilders said he was "incredibly happy" with the acquittal.
"It's not only an acquittal for me, but a victory for freedom of expression in the Netherlands," he said.

"Fortunately you're allowed to discuss Islam in public debate and you're not muzzled in public debate. An enormous burden has fallen from my shoulders."

Mr Wilders is widely known for his anti-Muslim message, which he called for a halt to Muslim immigration and to ban the Islamic faith's holy book, the Quran.

Wilders appearing in court in Amsterdam earlier this year
Soon after he made the comments he had to be put under police protection following a number of death threats.

Throughout the trial he has never shown any remorse for his words.

Before proceedings got under way last year, he gave a short statement: "I have said what I have said and I will not take one word back."

He argued that his statements represent the views of millions of Dutch voters, that they are protected by freedom of speech law, and that the court is biased against him, while the charges are politically motivated.

The trial was adjourned last year after Mr Wilders accused the judges of bias.

Wednesday, 22 June 2011
In what may be a world first, Muslims have turned down some free money from the kuffar in Sweden.

‘Young Muslims in Sweden’ is furious after the Swedish gambling monopoly Svenska Spel insulted the Islamic youth organization by trying to give it millions of euros. The president of the organization, Muhammad Harraki, rejected the money as haram (forbidden) under Islamic Sharia Laws.

Most forms of gambling are forbidden by Islam except for three which were specifically encouraged by the Islamic Prophet Mohammed. Islam allows wagers to be placed on horse and camel races as well as archery competitions but only between participating riders or archers. Spectators are not permitted to gamble.

Each year Svenska Spel, as mandated by the Swedish gambling laws, donates a large portion of its revenues to a wide range of community groups. The Swedish National Board for Youth Affairs receives 66% of its annual budget directly from monies lost by gamblers at traditional and online casino in Sweden.

Muhammad Harraki angrily spoke about the lack of respect shown to Islam by both Svenska Spel and the National Board for Youth Affairs. Mr. Harraki, is demanding that Sweden should include a full time Islamic advisor to be employed at both Svenska Spel and the National Board of Youth Affairs to prevent such insulting gestures from taking place again.

The Young Muslims in Sweden organization is also demanding to be reimbursed by the Swedish government with the new ‘gift’ money coming from ‘clean’ sources. The youth organization is also demanding an additional one million extra euros in funding for tolerance classes and workshops on Islam for Swedish National Board for Youth Affairs employees.

Haha! So the Muslims still want the money; they just want it to come from the gubmint instead.

Tuesday, 21 June 2011

Lampedusa finally gets an immigrant worth having! She was there to celebrate International Refugee Day. Total nonsense, of course, but at least the images are easier on the eye than most of those that have come out of Lampedusa recently.

Our Shared Future: Deconstructing the Clash of Civilizations from British Council on Vimeo.

A week or two ago I made a post about the Muslim agitator posing as a Conservative MEP for the North-West of England, Sajjad Karim. Because he is an MEP, we have a record of all his meetings with lobbyists, allowing us to see what subjects he is interested in. As might be expected, a highly disproportionate number of these meetings had an obvious Muslim angle. A few of these meetings related to something called the "Our Shared Europe" project, run by the British Council. So I decided to do a bit of follow-up research on it. What do you know, it turns out to be a taxpayer-financed multicult propaganda operation, specialising in the kind of guff that is no longer taken seriously even on the Guardian:

Our Shared Europe seeks to explore our shared values, perspectives and behaviours in a way that is based on mutual respect and trust. In particular it is about how to acknowledge the contribution of a diverse set of communities and cultures – both in the past but also in the present – to the shaping of contemporary European society. This means recognising the rich and diverse roots of our culture and society and using this recognition to build a more inclusive view of the continent that we all share.

Perhaps even more disturbing than the fact that British taxpayers are paying for the privilege of being propagandised with this dangerously foolish nonsense is that we are also exporting it. Our Shared Europe has a sister programme called Our Shared Future which, with a similar utopian slant, focuses on the Muslim presence in the USA.

These extracts should give you a flavour of it:

Recent debates – on Park 51, Koran-burning and Sharia law – highlight increasing levels of hostility and growing misconceptions about Islam and Muslim communities in the US. Controversy in Europe about integration, religious freedom and cultural diversity affects the American side of the Atlantic, increasing the need for balanced and informed voices to weigh in on these issues.

Our Shared Future will set out to:

Shift the terms of the debate on relations between Muslims and non-Muslims by providing access to a diverse group of informed commentators and experts whose views are based on credible research and rational arguments

Address some of the enduring myths and misconceptions that continue to polarize relations between Muslims and non-Muslims in Europe and the US. These issues include the concept of “Sharia law”, “Jihad”, freedom of expression and the relation between religion and politics

Disseminate constructive research and ideas at all levels of society through the Our Shared Future Network – a group of distinguished scholars, writers, policy-makers and journalists who are committed to improving trust and mutual understanding among diverse communities in the US and Europe

Typical of its output is this shocking propaganda post:

The images and stories coming from the Middle East and North Africa combine with these Gallup data to powerfully illustrate that many of the fears surrounding Islam are completely unfounded. Yes, the political outcome of the uprisings could take many forms. But nothing can change the fact that those Muslims who took to the streets undeniably want to share in values and freedoms common to those pursued in the West. These are our shared values.

In a time of across-the-board cuts to public services, how can this expenditure of public money possibly be justified? How is it a vital British interest to shape the relationship between Americans and the Mohammedans living amongst them? Is it not enough that we have destroyed our own country? Now we have to try and destroy other countries, too, in the same way?

The confirmed list of speakers at the summit includes Pamela Geller, the popular blogger and columnist who publishes the acclaimed blog and is the author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and the soon-to-be-released Stop the Islamization of America, A Practical Guide to the Resistance; Robert Spencer, a bestselling author and internationally renowned Islamic expert; the noted activist SIOE Director Anders Gravers; Roberta Moore of the Jewish Division -- EDL; Conny Meier of the German human rights group Pax Europa; frontrunning Bulgarian presidential candidate Pavel Chernev; and others to be announced soon.

The SIOA/SIOE summit will establish a common American/European coalition of free people who are determined to stand for freedom and oppose the advance of Islamic law, Sharia, which is not simply a religious system, but a political system that encompasses every aspect of life; is authoritarian, discriminatory, and repressive; and contradicts Western laws and principles in numerous particulars.

The SIOA/SIOE Strasbourg summit will begin at 1PM with a demonstration at Place de la République, followed by a conference at FEC 17 rue Saint Etienne at 3PM.

A teenager told a court yesterday that aged 16 she was sold for sex to restaurant workers. She said that eight men from two Indian restaurants and a fish and chip shop waited “one after the other” to have sex with her for sums ranging from £20 to £40.

She gave all the money to Mubarek Ali, who had persuaded her to “sort these guys out”. He gave her mobile phone credit in return.

The girl’s police interviews were the first of a series to be played to a jury at Stafford Crown Court where seven men, aged from 21 to 52, face 52 charges linked to the grooming and sexual exploitation of girls aged from 13 to 17.

Now aged 18, the teenager is the first of seven from the small Shropshire town of Wellington, near Telford, who are expected to give evidence.

The girl watched yesterday as interviews recorded in December 2009 and May last year were played. In them she spoke of her relationship with Mr Ali, 28, and his brother, Ahdel Ali, 23, both of whom are alleged to have sold her to other men for sex.

She said she was 15 when she first slept with the younger brother, known as Eddie. Later, she said, “he actually sold me to some Asians”.

The girl said that Mubarek Ali, known as Max, “was the one that started it” by selling her to three men who worked at a restaurant called Lal Komal.

“They’d ring Max up, asking, and then Max would ask if I was coming out and when I got in the car he’d ask me . . . to sort these guys out.”

One of the men would come out of the restaurant, she said, and she would be taken upstairs where “I’d have sex with him and two others”. This had been repeated on five or six occasions.

Asked whether she would be able to identify the men who slept with her, the girl said: “I don’t know their names; I know what they look like.” She said she was also taken to a fish and chip shop for sex with two men “a lot more than five or six times”.

“Did you ever say no?” the police officer asked her. “There was one time when I was actually pregnant and I said I didn’t want to do it,” she replied.

The court heard that the girl also slept with Tanveer Ahmed, 39, known as T, when she was 15. They went on to have sex “quite a lot” but theirs was “just a sex relationship”.

She said Mr Ahmed introduced her to Mohammed Islam Choudhrey, 52. She went with them to a flat where she “got paralytic” and had sex.

She subsequently met Mr Choudhrey regularly for sex, and got money, alcohol, drugs and two mobile phones. She kept some cash but “other times I used to give it to Eddie and Max”.

The Ali brothers, Mr Ahmed, Mr Choudhrey, Mohammed Ali Sultan, 24, Noshad Hussain, 21, and Mahroof Khan, 33, deny charges including two rapes, nine counts of controlling child prostitution, trafficking children within the UK for sexual exploitation and 20 charges of sexual activity with a child. The trial continues.

Source: The Times (£)
Monday, 20 June 2011
The Mail today has a story about judges complaining about lengthy, expensive and unjustified appeals against unfavourable immigration judgements.

Judges launch scathing attack on the 'abusive' way migrants exploit appeals and say most cases have no merit


Last updated at 10:09 AM on 20th June 2011

Judges have made an unprecedented attack on the ‘wholly abusive’ way that immigrants are exploiting the British legal system.

The Judges Council said that, for some types of appeal, a staggering 85 per cent of cases did not have any ‘merit’.

They have either been ‘dreamt up’ by lawyers seeking to line their own pockets, or are a blatant last-ditch attempt to stop deportations taking place.

Many – including appeals made by foreign criminals – are brought under the controversial Article 8 of Labour’s Human Rights Act – the ‘right to a family and private life’.

And despite the rampant exploitation of the system, the taxpayer is writing legal cheques worth £12million a year for immigration cases. Effectively – and farcically – the British Government is picking up the bill for the thwarting of its own attempts to control immigration.

In a single year, the public funded a staggering 37,300 immigration appeals, according to Ministry of Justice figures seen by the Mail. It is the equivalent of more than 100 cases every day.

Justice officials say the legal aid is being spent on ‘advice on how to get a visa to enter the UK, or how to avoid being deported once they’re here’.

It includes advice to immigrants from Europe looking to work in Britain, and migrants from outside Europe who want to study, get work experience or join their families who have emigrated to the UK.

In a devastating letter to Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke, the Judges Council of England and Wales – which speaks for the judiciary – paints a picture of appalling abuse. The judges say that, out of 12,500 judicial review claim forms issued in the Administrative Court in 2010, about 7,500 concerned asylum or immigration.

The claims have been considered – and dismissed – by the Secretary of State and at least one immigration tribunal, making the judicial review a ‘second or sometimes the third or fourth bite of the cherry’.

The judges’ letter to Mr Clarke goes on: ‘Most claims fail, most of the claims which fail are without merit, and many are wholly abusive of the court’s process.

‘When the claim itself is publicly funded, two sets of publicly funded costs will be incurred – all irrecoverable. No-one derives any legitimate benefit from this litigation.
‘The intervention of publicly funded lawyers does not reduce the number of unmeritorious claims of this type to the extent that might be expected. Bad claims are advanced by publicly funded lawyers as well as by litigants in person – albeit litigants in person are responsible for a greater proportion of hopeless cases. Often, bad claims are advanced by lawyers which an individual would not have thought of for himself.’

One senior immigration judge, Sir Anthony May, said most claims he heard were the third or fourth time a person had been to a tribunal. They are brought by failed asylum seekers trying to block their removal at the last minute.

Sir Anthony said: ‘Sometimes we have to deal with 20 or even more such applications every day when there is a chartered flight going out of Gatwick, Stansted or wherever it is. Let us say that 85 per cent of them – that is a figure I rather pluck out of the air but it is of that order – are of no merit.’

But this state of affairs exists precisely because the judges insisted in the past that judicial review should still apply to asylum and immigration decisions. In 2004, Labour planned to exempt such decisions from judicial review using a so-called "ouster" clause in the the Asylum and Immigration Bill that was then working its way through parliament. The judges kicked up an enormous fuss about it. They even spoke of simply defying the will of parliament if the measure was enacted:

The Home Office is talking tough, but in the department of constitutional affairs the realisation is dawning that the judges have a potential weapon of mass destruction. The fear is that they could invoke what the Liberal Democrat peer and QC Lord Goodhart called the "nuclear option"- refusing to enforce the clause and allowing cases to go the high court nevertheless. "Some judges have been talking about it," he told BBC Radio 4's World at One yesterday.

Removing judicial review of immigration judgements would, it was said, provoke "the gravest constitutional clash this country has seen for more than 300 years". The Conservatives supported the judges in their agitation and in the end Labour backed down and removed these sections from the bill.

So the judges fought tooth and nail to preserve their right to intervene in asylum and immigration cases and now complain that the vast majority of them are unjustified and a waste of time and money. Of course they are. That was the whole point of introducing the limitation in the first place.

Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews