Monday, 28 July 2014

A Haven for Persecuted Christians?

Coffins of Christians killed for their faith in the Middle East


A reader and Facebook friend, Felipe, wrote to me saying that he's a young Christian tired of seeing the world getting worse and our Western civilisation getting lost.

"We are even persecuted by standing up in our righteous cause" he writes, "we have no strength because we don't have our own space".

So he suggests that persecuted Christians should relocate and flourish as a new nation, in a new place that he thinks could be Argentina.

"Argentina is a vast and rich country in terms of soil, stock, water... there is a lot of unused land and we could create a society that eventually grows and takes more control to eventually be an example and God knows what from there", he says.

Since most Europeans don't seem to worry about what's going on and only think of shopping and travel, doing nothing while they are invaded, he believes that they can join in this relocation too. Felipe claims: "I think Europe needs a solid back-up for anything coming."

This part of the plan doesn't look realistic to me. Apart from the practical difficulties of all native Europeans moving to Argentina, the same problems of invasion from Islam and the Third World are likely to follow them to the South American country. If people don't recognise the disastrous situation here, they won't recognise it there either and won't do anything to stop it.

But the rest of his idea is good, although I don't know how it can be put into practice.

Christians are persecuted, oppressed, kidnapped and killed all over the world, and they have nowhere to go. They flee Iraq to go to Syria, only to find there the same horrible fate again.

I had heard before the idea of an "Israel for Christians", a haven for them. In my opiniont it's worth exploring and spreading the idea.

Protect UK Lorry Drivers from Illegals

Liberty GB campaign Protect Our Truckers!

My party Liberty GB has just launched a campaign to defend British lorry drivers who are threatened and attacked in ports of continental Europe by illegal immigrants.

Sunday, 27 July 2014

Guess What Londonistan and Babel Have in Common

London has become a Tower of Babel. A salon wanted me to have my hair cut and styled by a hairdresser who couldn't speak a word of English and could only speak Arabic. How can you have your hair done by somebody with whom you can't communicate?

In pizza restaurants, people who take the orders for take-aways regularly confuse "artichoke" (word with which they are probably unfamiliar) with "cheese", whereas they are in fact, well, like (arti)chalk and cheese. And, being a takeaway, you can't send the dish back to the kitchen and have it replaced. By the time you discover the mistake, you're at home.

The ultimate affront is having discovered an Italian restaurant in the Edgware Road - a central London thoroughfare that could hardly be distinguishable from Cairo, Beirut or Baghdad - with signs in Arabic: I suppose they must have them, unless they want to lose all their business in such a heavily Arabic area.

Friday, 25 July 2014

Syrian Jihadis' First Imminent Threat to the West Is to Norway

Norway's security services PST's chief Benedicte Bjoernland (centre) announced a national security alert


First, Norway. The UK could be next. There will be an Islamic atrocity sooner or later.

Norway’s security services, PST, warned of an imminent, “concrete and credible” threat to the Scandinavian country in the week that marked the third anniversary of the mass killings by Anders Behring Breivik.

The terrorist attack, "probably within a few days", will come from fighters involved in the conflict in Syria. The target, how or when such an attack would take place is unspecified.

According to PST’s assessment, about 50 people have travelled from Norway to fight in Syria. Half of them have gone back to Norway, and the intelligence agency could not rule out that people involved with this threat are already in Norway.

From RT's "West under threat: Terrorists from Syria are heading to Norway - officials":
A terrorist group has left Syria and is heading to Norway, said Norwegian intelligence officials. The statement comes the day after the country’s authorities were informed of a possible “terrorist attack” and took security measures.

We received information that a group of people have traveled from Syria with the goal of carrying out a terror attack in the West, and Norway is specifically named,” Jon Fitje Hoffmann, a strategic analysis chief from PST, the Norwegian security intelligence group, told TV2, the largest commercial television station in Norway, “That was the starting point for the situation we are in now.” [Emphasis added]
From the Financial Times:
“We have information that a terrorist attack is planned on Norway in a short time, probably within a few days,” Benedicte Bjørnland, head of the security services, told a hastily called press conference on Thursday.

“We have received information that there are people who have fought on the ground in Syria involved. We are keeping all possibilities open. We will work intensely to develop a clearer picture of the threat.”

Thursday, 24 July 2014

UK Taxpayers Forced to Pay Sharia Charity

Red Cross mission attacked by civilians in Gaza


I wrote here about how the donations from zakat (Muslim obligatory charity) increase particularly during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. This is worrisome, since zakat money is used to fund jihad and terrorism worldwide, as Sharia commands.

One international charity based in Britain, Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW), has been banned from operating in Israel because suspected of funnelling cash to Hamas.

Now its UK affiliate, Islamic Relief UK, proudly announces:
This Ramadan, your donations to Islamic Relief will be doubled, pound for pound, up to £5 million, with match-funding from the UK government!
British taxpayers will thus be forced to finance an operation with possibly sinister aims.

H/t to David Brown and George Whale

Wednesday, 23 July 2014

The Illiberalism of "Liberals"

Sir Godfrey Kneller's portrait of classical liberal philosopher John Locke


This article was inspired by the reading of a piece by one of my favourite authors, Theodore Dalrymple, entitled "The Rosenbergs, Always".

Its subtitle is "Liberals remain soft on Communism."

The problem is that those who today, especially in America, are called "liberals" are not liberal; they are soft on communism because they are cut from the same cloth. The use of the word "liberal" to mean people on the Left originated perhaps from Norman Thomas, six-time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America, who, according to the newspaper The Spokesman Review of 26 February 1967, said:
The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without knowing how it happened.
This quote is disputed, but not this other, from a 1951 letter to Norman Thomas from Upton Sinclair, the American author who ran for Congress for the Socialist Party twice and for the governorship of California for the Democratic Party in 1934:
The American People will take Socialism, but they won't take the label. I certainly proved it in the case of EPIC. Running on the Socialist ticket I got 60,000 votes, and running on the slogan to 'End Poverty in California' I got 879,000. I think we simply have to recognize the fact that our enemies have succeeded in spreading the Big Lie. There is no use attacking it by a front attack, it is much better to out-flank them.
Also undisputed is the fact that American socialists have tried to adopt other names for themselves, both to diguise the nature of their doctrine and because of American instinctive dislike for totalitarian ideologies like socialism.

Reassurances like the Social Democrats USA's "Social Democracy is a true American tradition" are felt necessary to overcome a natural American diffidence.

This is why US socialist Edward Bellamy inspired the formation of the Nationalist Clubs. The June 1898 edition of the organ for Fabian Socialists in the United States, the American Fabian magazine, observes:
In Bellamy, social science and imagination were combined at their best. He has given us a substantial revelation whose scientific deductions from economic phenomena are unassailable. In the work of speeding the light he has made the valued distinction between Nationalism and Socialism. Nations advance toward their destiny upon lines marked out by the temper of their peoples, the character of their institutions, the conditions of soil, climate, and surroundings. Consequently the forward movement must be by national rather than international pathways. Bellamy saw this clearly, and formulating his Socialism to a purely American applicability, named it Nationalism. What has been the result? We hear no more the philistine cry that Socialism is an alien product. The far-reaching influence of "Looking Backward" has given us a native development of this definite form of Socialism, and has made possible the realization of his dreams in the near future. [Emphasis added]
Whatever one thinks of real liberalism (or socialism, for that matter), classic liberalism is very different from socialism.

To see that it's sufficient to look at their respective concepts of human rights, for example. Liberals view human rights as negative rights, namely freedom from interference from the state or other individuals, whereas socialists and communists see them as positive rights, namely entitlements to the statisfaction of every man's need, following Karl Marx's formula for communism: from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

Tuesday, 22 July 2014

Taliban Rejects "Extremism" in Religion

Pakistani Taliban spokesman Shahidullah Shahid


A Reuters article contains the intriguing phrase, intriguing because reportedly it's from the Taliban: "Muslims also should avoid extremism in religion".

Jihad Watch remarks:
The Taliban, in saying this, demonstrate that they don’t consider themselves to be “extremist.” This word is thrown around everywhere, but like “moderate,” no one bothers to define it precisely. Everyone assumes that its meaning is obvious, but it isn’t. It would be useful and illuminating to have a debate between Muslims who support the Taliban and Muslims who oppose it on what constitutes “extremism.” But that will never happen, as it would require honest discussion of Islamic doctrines that Muslim spokesmen in the West are doing a fine job of obfuscating.
It's true: nobody has defined "moderate" or "extremist" in Islam. That's how and why these terms are used to foster the Islamophilic agenda: because they're useless. The fact that the Taliban can use the term "extremism" to dissociate itself from it (and to condemn it), as they don't consider themselves extremist, tells you a lot about the vagueness and consequent inutility of the word.