Smoky Mountains Sunrise
Showing posts with label Islamisation of Britain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Islamisation of Britain. Show all posts

Sunday, July 10, 2011

The Vision of Sir Winston Churchill - Then and Now

When we read the following speech by Rabbi Nachum Shifren, we knew it was a speech we had to share with Sunlit Uplands readers.  Rabbi Shifren evokes the memory and words of our blog's patron, Sir Winston Churchill, in rallying people of good will to the defense of Western civilization.  As Rabbi Shifren points out, the struggle in which the West finds itself today is no less serious, and in many ways a continuation of that great struggle led by Churchill -- away from the "abyss of a new dark age" and "forward into broad, sunlit uplands.''

Rabbi Shifren's speech is addressed to the thousands of supporters of the English Defense League in Luton, England.

By Rabbi Nachum Shifren

For millions of Americans such as myself, there remains a special grandeur in the British people, long after the "Great War" has ended, long after the average schoolboy or girl has stopped recalling that there was once a real threat to the entire island.

What we remember most from those long-forgotten trials of fire, is the tremendous spirit of defiance, an unyielding attitude of tenacity in the face of an overwhelming evil. There are no fitting words to use in recounting the admiration that has been shown for that great statesman and hero to all that understand and cherish what we have in our Western civilization, the great Sir Winston Churchill.

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Former Archbishop of Canterbury: 'I Fear for My Grandchildren'

Lord Carey Calls for Christian Values to be Defended

From the Daily Mail

James Slack

The former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey yesterday warned that Britain will be in ‘deep trouble’ if it does not cut immigration and stand up for its Christian values.

He called for a dramatic reduction in migrant numbers and insisted those who want to enter the UK should be made to understand its Christian heritage.

Lord Carey said: ‘We Christians are very often so soft that we allow other people to walk over us and we are not as tough in what we want, in expressing our beliefs, because we do not want to upset other people.’

Read the rest of this entry >>

Lord Carey: Wants immigrants to Britain to understand its Christian heritage

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Bishop Quits Anglican Church to Fight Jihad

Something is seriously wrong in Christendom when a bishop must resign his position to defend Christians. Isn't that why they are called "shepherds?"

From Front Page Magazine
By Mark D. Tooley

Britain’s leading ecclesiastical critic of radical Islam is retiring early so as to help persecuted Christians suffering under Islamist regimes. Church of England Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali of Rochester aroused jihadist death threats last year when he publicly warned about encroaching Islamism in Britain. Born in Pakistan and from a family that converted away from Islam, Nazir-Ali has championed Britain’s Christian roots and condemned multiculturalist accommodation towards anti-Western ideologies.

“Scourge of Church Liberals to Step Down,” declared one British newspaper about Nazir-Ali, whose family received police protection last year. Besides defending Britain’s traditional British culture against Islamists and multiculturalists, the Bishop of Rochester further irked his critics by siding with African and other Global South bishops against theologically and sexually liberalizing tendencies in Western churches. Last year he skipped the once a decade “Lambeth” gathering of the global Anglican Communion’s bishops, hosted by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Instead, he attended an alternative gathering for hundreds of more adamantly orthodox Anglican bishops who convened in Jerusalem, at the invitation of the senior Anglican prelates of Nigeria and Kenya, among others.

Nazir-Ali was a candidate to become the Archbishop of Canterbury in 2003 but was overlooked in favor of Rowan Williams, who fecklessly suggested last year that Britain accommodate some aspects of Islamic law. Only age 59, Nazir-Ali is young enough that he possibly could have been considered for the title when Williams presumably retires in 2014. But Nazir-Ali seems to have been called to a different vocation.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Thursday, March 12, 2009

Britain is in Grave Danger from the New Enemy Within

From The Daily Express
By Leo McKinstry

ONE of the most moving but little-known episodes of the Second World War was Operation Exodus when, in the early summer of 1945, the RAF flew home tens of thousands of liberated British prisoners of war from northern Europe.

Many had been incarcerated for five years in German PoW camps until they were freed by the Allies.

As the planes flew over the English Channel and the white cliffs of Dover came into view, the spirits of this bedraggled but heroic army soared. Some cheered, others whistled. A few brave souls sat still with tears rolling down their cheeks.

They were almost back in their native land where they would be treated with the warmth and respect that their sacrifices had earned.

But in fragmented modern Britain, returning heroes are guaranteed no such welcome.

This is a land where patriotism has been eroded and the very concept of Britishness is vanishing. As a result of mass immigration and the ideology of multiculturalism, those who risk their lives on our behalf are no longer honoured in the way that they deserve.

PROTEST: Abu Omar, Abu Shadeed, Abu Abdullah and Hussein Ahmed

That was made all too graphically clear this week in the disgraceful scenes that marred the homecoming parade from Iraq of the 2nd Battalion, the Royal Anglian Regiment, in Luton in Bedfordshire.

Read the rest of this entry>>

Friday, February 13, 2009

The Islamization of Britain Continues.......

Queen Boadicea, the Ancient British Queen

On the heels of Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders' deportation from Britain, we wonder if a militant atheist, or anti-Christian zealot would have met the same fate in that once Christian nation. Geert Wilders was responding to an invitation to show a well documented film that exposes the clear teachings of the Koran. That his message could not even be heard in the Palace of Westminster is a measure of how advanced the nation's dhimmitude is, even in the Mother of Parliaments.

The British national security service, MI5, has identified over 2,000 Islamists posing a national security threat. Has anything been done to deport a single one of them? The silencing of Geert Wilders in a nation that once championed freedom of speech will accelerate the colonization of that nation by barbarians who will overturn the progress of a millenium toward freedom and human rights and return her, in the words of Tennyson, "to the slave, the scourge, the chain."

Walter Bagehot said that "England invented the phrase 'Her Majesty's Opposition'; that it was the first government which made a criticism of administration as much a part of the polity as administration itself." Has that been lost? Are the political elites simply facilitating the handover of their people to the colonizers? Where is the Boadicea who will finally say "enough!"?

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Dutch MP Geert Wilders Deported after Flying to Britain to Show Anti-Islamic Film

A controversial Dutch politician has been sent back to Holland after trying to enter Britain to show his anti-Muslim film in the House of Lords.

From The Telegraph
By Christopher Hope, John Bingham and Bruno Waterfield

Geert Wilders had been invited to Westminster to show his 17-minute film Fitna, which criticises the Koran as a "fascist book", by a member of the House of Lords.

But on Tuesday Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary refused Mr Wilders entry because his opinions "would threaten community security and therefore public security" in the UK.

Mr Wilders went ahead with his trip anyway, and flew from Amsterdam to London on a British Midland flight.

When he arrived at Heathrow airport he was met by two plain clothed officers from the UK Border Agency.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

The Decline of the English-Speaking World

At the same time as sharia law has gained official recognition as a part of the British legal system and Muslims proudly talk about conquering the Western world, a British woman was arrested because of a supposedly "racist" doll she kept in her window. In al-Britannia a Muslim man can claim benefits for children with multiple wives and brag about subduing the country and reducing its traditional inhabitants to second-rate citizens or worse, but you cannot have a "racially insensitive" doll in your own home, at least not if you're white.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Thursday, December 4, 2008

Britain: Catholic Bishops Bowing to Islam Deserve Swift Kick

From Tundra Tabloids

Catholic Bishops in England and in Wales bow to Islam by calling for Catholic schools to accommodate Muslim prayer rooms and religious washing facilities.

And while these Bishops are down on the ground groveling before the Islamic community, it would be a most opportune time to complete the spectacle by delivering to each and every one of them a swift kick in the seat of their pants for good measure. Stupid is as stupid does.


Muslim prayer rooms should be opened in every Roman Catholic school, church leaders have said. The Catholic bishops of England and Wales also want facilities in schools for Islamic pre-prayer washing rituals.

The demands go way beyond legal requirements on catering for religious minorities. But the bishops - who acknowledge 30 per cent of pupils at their schools hold a non-Christian faith - want to answer critics who say religious schools sow division.

The recommendations were made in a document, Catholic Schools, Children of Other Faiths and Community Cohesion. 'If practicable, a room (or rooms) might be made available for the use of pupils and staff from other faiths for prayer,' the bishops said. 'Existing toilet facilities might be adapted to accommodate individual ritual cleansing which is sometimes part of religious lifestyle and worship.

'If such space is not available on a permanent or regular basis, extra efforts might be made to address such need for major religious festivals.' The Islamic cleansing ritual, called 'Wudhu', is carried out by Muslims before they pray.

Wudhu!? Wudhu you think you're fooling!? Well apparently not everyone, a spark of sanity seen in south London :

Daphne McLeod, a former Catholic head teacher from south London, said it would be 'terribly expensive' for the country's 2,300 Catholic primary and secondary schools to provide ritual cleansing facilities. She said: 'If Muslim parents choose a Catholic school then they accept that it is going to be a Catholic school and there will not be facilities for ritual cleansing and prayer rooms. 'They do their ritual cleansing before they go to a mosque, but they are not going to a mosque. 'I don't think the bishops should go looking for problems. Where will it stop?'

Exactly the point, it won't ever stop, the list of grievances and demands will go on and on until the host society is conforming to Islamic sharia. Those who help the followers of the madman from the Arabian desert, are useful stooges, no matter how well intended their actions may be. Any Christian or Jewish religious leader that allows for any such tomfoolery, show that they do not have their communities best interests at heart.

Monday, September 15, 2008

Sharia Courts in Britain Now Legally Binding

From The Brussels Journal
By A. Millar

Before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, few us knew anything about Islam, and no one had heard of sharia law. A couple of years ago even, it seemed unimaginable that Britain would adopt Islamic law.

We have sunk further and quicker than we thought possible. Today we learned that sharia courts (which have operated illegally in Britain until now) are being re-classed as tribunal hearings, making their judgments legally binding. According to the Daily Express, “new powers have been given to tribunals in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester with the network’s headquarters in Nuneaton, Warwickshire. Two more courts are being planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh.” According to the Daily Mail, this “[…] new network of courts […] agree[s] to be bound by traditional sharia law, and under the 1996 Arbitration Act the court's decisions can then be enforced by the county courts or the High Court.”

It is almost unbelievable that this should occur in a modern, democratic, Western country, and, moreover, under a government that claims to be liberal, and to care about the right of women and homosexuals among others. But, tracing the actions of the pro-Islamic Labour Party, and of modern liberalism more generally, it should have been predictable. Modern liberalism is not a force for human rights and equality (though it still uses these terms where they can be of use in breaking down British tradition); it is a selfish urge for freedom for one’s own self – others be damned. Multiculturalism frees the liberal from the demands of ‘culture.’ Mass immigration frees him from the need to know his history. Invoking the Inquisition of three hundred years ago frees him from having to confront the reality of Islamic fundamentalism. The establishment of sharia law no doubt frees him from holding any position whatsoever.

I have pointed out before, that the Labour government has colluded with extremist Muslims, even employing a Holocaust denier as an advisor on Muslim affairs. Ken Livingstone, the former Left-wing Mayor of London, has also openly embraced Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a man who believes that wives can be beaten into submission, that homosexuals should be executed, and pregnant Israeli women should be murdered. The UK’s Left-wing Respect Coalition Party asserts that opposition to radical Islam is “the new racism,” and this dangerous sentiment is now received wisdom among those closer to the center of the political spectrum. But Islam is neither a race nor ethnicity, but a religion, and one that has Asian, Black, and White followers. A 2006 UK government report entitled ‘Young Muslims and Extremism,’ notes that a significant number of White Britons were being drawn into Islamic terrorism, and we have seen a few example of White Muslim jihadis since then.

The sharia courts operating in Britain, will hear and pass legally binding judgment on cases involving divorce, financial disputes, and even domestic violence. But, it will not end there. According to the Daily Mail, sharia court officials have said, that they hope, “[…] to take over growing numbers of 'smaller' criminal cases in future,” and extremist clerics have already asserted their aims to establish sharia law for everyone in Britain. Only yesterday, the Sun newspaper showed a video of radical clerics announcing plans to take over Britain:
It may be by pure conversion that Britain will become an Islamic state. We may never need to conquer it from the outside.

This, among other similar pronouncements, was made at a rally billed as a debate on whether the West had “learned the lessons” of the September 11 terrorist attacks. Apparently, we have not.

Sharia law regards women as inferior to men, and non-Muslims as inferior to Muslims, and it demands the execution of homosexuals. Sharia courts in Britain have already tried cases in domestic violence, and have issued no punishments beyond requiring the abuser get mentoring from Muslim elders and to attend anger management classes. In my opinion, this is an entirely unacceptable judgment for those who inflict violence on women. According to the Daily Mail, again:

In one recent inheritance dispute in Nuneaton, a Muslim man's estate was spit was between three daughters and two sons with each son receiving twice as much as each daughter – in keeping with sharia law.

The establishment of sharia law in Britain, even on a minor scale, not only undermines British law and culture of equality ‘under the law,’ with cases judged by a jury of one’s peers, but is implicitly menacing to people of all non-Muslim religions, atheists, conservatives, women, homosexuals, and people of all racial and ethnic backgrounds.

Conservatives and Christians have criticized the so-called “gay lifestyle,” and liberals have always furiously denounced those conservatives and Christians for saying this. But liberals are those who have remained utterly silent when extremist Muslim clerics have called for the execution of homosexuals or the beating of women. The liberal establishment generally, and the Labour government in particular, has betrayed their professed belief in human rights and equality, and are ushering in extremism and intolerance. If their proposed new Bill of Rights for the UK goes ahead as planned, extremist Muslims may have yet another advantage, as it is proposed that religious minorities will be given additional rights, thus possibly reinforcing sharia.

Whatever their difference, the people of Britain must form a broad coalition to oppose such extremism. The homosexual man or woman, the Hindu, Sikh, and atheist, have as much to lose as the White British Christian.

Wednesday, September 3, 2008

British Muslims Offended by Christians Praying During Ramadan

A Christian group in Oxford has apologised to the city’s Muslims for having the audacity to organise a day of prayer during Ramadan. Oxfords Muslims found it ‘ill-conceived and insensitive’, not to mention ‘grossly insulting and inflammatory’.

The Muslim Education Centre of Oxford (MECO) has accused the Evangelical group ‘Open Doors UK’ of preaching ‘evangelical propaganda’.

Do not Muslims preach Islamic propaganda? Do the Christians in Oxford complain about this? Would the Muslims of Oxford apologise or even care if the Christians did complain about it?

But the greatest offence was taken because the Christians had dared to refer to their event as a ‘Call to Prayer’. Apparently, only Muslims may now use this term.

Thursday, July 31, 2008

Is Britain Dying?

Hat Tip to Gates of Vienna and Beer N Sandwiches for the following video showing the suicidal depravity of the multiculturalism and political correctness that are destroying Great Britain and other western nations. In Britain we see a nation that has lost the moorings of its Christian heritage, and forgotten its own rich history and the patrimony it has shared with the world.

Having had a maternal grandfather who was English, and having spent many beautiful summer days on the North Sea coast of Norfolk, it is shocking how quickly this disease of self-loathing and self-destruction has permeated British life. One would like to think that a new government would be enough to change the course of things. Unfortunately, the problem is not merely one of policy, but of spirit. Let us pray that God in His mercy will change hearts and save a nation that has given the world so much.

An eleventh century Archbishop of Canterbury offered a sure path for the people of his time and ours. In The Proslogian St. Anselm wrote:
I will seek you by desiring you, and desire you in seeking you.
I will find you by loving you, and love you in finding you.
I praise and give thanks to you that you have made me in your image,
so that I can remember you, think of you, love you,
But so darkened is your image in me by the smoke of my sins,
that it is useless unless you restore it.
I do not seek, O Lord, to search out your depths, but only in some measure to understand your truth, which my heart believes and loves.
I do not seek to understand so that I may believe, but believe that I may understand.
For this I know to be true: that unless I first believe I shall not understand.

Saturday, June 7, 2008

Christianity 'Discriminated Against by Gordon Brown's Government'

Christianity is being discriminated against by the Government in favour of Islam and other minority faiths, according to a landmark Church of England report.

From The Daily Telegraph
By Jonathan Wynne-Jones

The Archbishop of Canterbury has endorsed the report.

The damning critique of Labour, which is endorsed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, says ministers are only paying "lip service" to the Anglican Church while "focusing intently" on other religions.

It claims Gordon Brown's Government is failing society and lacks a moral vision for the country.

And in an end to decades of tension between the Church and the Conservatives, the comprehensive study praises the Tories for their "strident" approach to combating poverty.

Instead it says it is Labour which is failing to acknowledge the breakdown in society and excluding vital religious voices.

The report urges the Government to appoint a minister for religion, who would serve as the Prime Minister's faith envoy and utilise the untapped reserves of volunteers in churches and charities.

It states: "We encountered on the part of the Government a significant lack of understanding, or interest in, the Church of England's current or potential contribution in the public sphere.

"Indeed we were told that Government had consciously decided to focus...almost exclusively on minority religions."

The highly critical report, titled Moral, But No Compass - a twist on Mr Brown's claim to have a "moral compass" - carries significant weight as it has been endorsed by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York and expresses the views of three-quarters of the Church's bishops.

It echoes claims made by the Bishop of Rochester, the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, last week that the decline of Christian values is destroying Britishness and has created a "moral vacuum" which radical Islam is filling.

The report, which has been seen by The Daily Telegraph, says that while the Government has tried to improve social cohesion, it has failed to appreciate the potential contribution of Christian groups to the "civic health and wellbeing" of society.

"We were told that while capacity studies had been undertaken by Government with regard to British Islam, similar studies had not been carried out for any of the UK's largest faith communities.

"If what we were told is correct, the churches simply do not register on the policy-making radar in serious terms.

"The Government has focused so intensely on minority faiths that it has failed to develop a coherent evidence base for the largest religious body in the UK, the Christian church."

The report adds: "The government is planning blind and failing parts of civil society. The government has good intentions, but is moral without a compass.

"Every participant in our study from the Church agreed that there was deep 'religious illiteracy' on the part of the Government."

A report published in 1985 damned Thatcherism for the growing spiritual and economic poverty in Britain.

But now, in a remarkable shift in the stance of the Church, the Conservatives are praised for their "genuine thirst to understand and combat poverty".

The new study, commissioned by the Church and written by academics based at the Von Hugel Institute at Cambridge University, states: "Despite many voices in the Church telling us, 'there is no difference between any of the parties on these issues,' the reality is otherwise.

"Of all our interviewees, Conservative advisors and politicians were among the most comfortable and enthusiastic regarding involving faith groups in this renewal of the third sector, and believed that Christian churches had something 'unique' to bring to the table as strong local leaders."

Eric Pickles, shadow secretary for communities and local government, said: "David Cameron's Conservatives recognise that we have to tackle a damaged society and that poverty can't be cured without the help of voluntary organisations, such as the Church which plays a vital part.

"The Church has not retreated from the difficult problems faced by many communities."

The Execution of Britain

From The Brussels Journal
By Fjordman

I will defend all Western and indeed infidel countries against Islamic Jihad, but I admit I feel especially close to Britain, not just because of the long cultural and historic ties between Scandinavia and the British Isles, but also because I appreciate the good that has come out of British culture. It makes me all the more sad to see how humiliated this great nation is today, and how many natives feel forced to leave what once was their country.

In May 2008, 18 year-old Ben Smith was stopped in a routine check. The police officer noticed an English flag on the parcel shelf and ordered him to remove it because it was "racist towards immigrants." One of the first things foreign powers usually do when they invade a country is to ban its national symbols. The fact that you can no longer run your flag in parts of Britain – and the Netherlands, Sweden, France, etc. – shows that the country is de facto under occupation, not just by Muslims, but by Multiculturalists and Globalists of all kinds.

In an essay entitled Put away the flags, Howard Zinn, the Leftist author of the best-selling book A People's History of the United States, writes that "On this July 4, we would do well to renounce nationalism and all its symbols: its flags, its pledges of allegiance, its anthems, its insistence in song that God must single out America to be blessed. Is not nationalism – that devotion to a flag, an anthem, a boundary so fierce it engenders mass murder – one of the great evils of our time, along with racism, along with religious hatred?" He concludes that "We need to assert our allegiance to the human race, and not to any one nation."

The problem is, rights can only be protected by sovereign states upholding their territorial integrity. How is "the global community" or "the human race" going to protect Mr. Zinn's liberties? For a free society to function, the state has to pass laws in the best interest of its citizenry and enforce these within its territory. Otherwise, self-government is impossible. In order to defend this territory from outside aggression, people need to identify with it as something more than just a random space on a map. By removing sovereign states, you remove the very foundations of a free society. Maybe some groups actually desire this?

The British Foreign Minister Milliband stated late in 2007 that the European Union should expand to include Muslim nations in North Africa and the Middle East. The French President Sarkozy and the German Chancellor Angela Merkel confirmed this early in 2008. Since the EU involves the free movement of people across borders, European leaders are thus opening the floodgates to tens of millions of Muslims at a time when native Europeans already feel like aliens in their own cities. It's the greatest betrayal in the history of Western civilization and it has been planned for many years, as those who have read Bat Ye'or's writings about Eurabia will know.

I believe native Europeans should seriously consider creating a European Indigenous People's Movement to protect our interests. Our authorities currently reward those who use violence and punish those who don't. Native Europeans are ignored if we protest peacefully against mass immigration or the expanding pan-European superstate. Muslims get concessions while we are treated with increasing hostility from those who are supposed to be our leaders.

Muslims in Jordan, a country that takes part in the Barcelona process of "Euro-Mediterranean cooperation" and thus a likely future EU member, recently sued the Danish cartoonists who drew Muhammad for "blasphemy" against Islam, a "crime" that potentially carries the death penalty according to sharia law. Not too many years into the future, we could face a situation where citizens of, say, Denmark could be arrested by their own authorities and handed over to be tried for "crimes against Islam" in one of the Arab "partner countries" of the EU. If this sounds unthinkable to you, look at the case of the Dutch cartoonist who was recently arrested by a dozen police officers for the crime of publishing cartoons insulting immigrants.

PM Tony Blair expressed "profound relief" over the end of a hostage crisis in 2007 where British soldiers had been kidnapped by the Islamic Republic of Iran, telling the mullahs that "we bear you no ill will." Blair will be remembered as one of the worst leaders in history. Even Chamberlain didn't flood his country with enemies and present this as something positive. Mass immigration has been going on for decades but showed a spectacular increase under Blair's and Brown's Labour regime. The spike was so powerful that it is tempting to speculate whether the authorities had deliberately set out to dismantle their own nation.

According to newspaper columnist Leo McKinstry, the English are being turned into second-class citizens in their own country: "England is in the middle of a profoundly disturbing social experiment. For the first time in a mature democracy, a Government is waging a campaign of aggressive discrimination against its indigenous population."

Similar things are happening all over the Western world, not just in England or Britain, but Britain is definitely one of the worst countries, yes. I've been debating with people which country is most likely to get the first Eurabian civil war triggered by mass immigration. There are several possible candidates, but my money is on Britain, because the anger among ordinary citizens is only rivaled by the brutal political repression tactics.

In a survey published in April 2008, one in three medical doctors in Britain said that elderly patients should not be given free treatment if it were unlikely to do them good for long. At the same time, Muslim men with multiple wives have been given the go-ahead to claim extra welfare benefits. The "welfare state" now means that the natives should watch grandma die because she's getting old anyway and we need the money to pay Muslims with multiple wives and numerous children so that they can feel comfortable while colonizing the country.

Also in April 2008, David T, a stunned dad and his little boy, were banned from swimming at a popular public sports center in east London because this was a "Muslim men-only swimming" session. Several Christian priests have been physically attacked by Muslims in east London, leading one bishop to worry about "no-go-zones" for Christian in some parts of the country. In early June, a Muslim police community support officer ordered Christian preachers to stop handing out gospel leaflets in a predominantly Muslim area of Birmingham. They were threatened with arrest for committing a "hate crime" and were told they risked being beaten up if they returned. In March 2008, two Islamic terrorists were moved to different prisons after complaining that their fellow inmates were "too white." Dhiren Barot had masterminded a radioactive bomb plot involving limousines packed with nails and explosives and Omar Khyam plotted to blow up the Bluewater shopping centre in Kent.

How do native Brits react to this? Well, some get angry, as they should. Bryan Cork, 49, was jailed for six months for "racist slurs" after he had shouted insults at Muslim worshippers outside a Cumbria mosque, including "proud to be British" and "go back to where you came from." This was after the London Jihadist bombings in 2005. Judge Paul Batty told him that racism in any form would not be tolerated. I hear much talk about "national suicide" these days, but Mr. Cork apparently had no desire to commit national suicide, he was held down by his own authorities for refusing to accept the organized destruction of his nation. What we are dealing with here isn't suicide; it's an execution of an entire nation, perhaps an entire civilization, the greatest civilization ever created by man.

Even children face this kind of ideological intimidation. Codie Stott, a teenage British schoolgirl, was forced to spend hours in a police cell after she was reported by her teachers for "racism." She had objected, in the mildest possible terms, to being placed during class with a group of South Asian immigrants who talked among themselves in a language she didn't understand. For this, she was dragged to the local police station and had her fingerprints and photograph taken. 18-year-old Jamie who has Down's syndrome and the mental age of a five-year-old was charged with "racism" after an argument with an immigrant. Meanwhile, the UK is being brought to its knees in an epidemic of violent crime and white native girls get raped by immigrants in spectacular numbers, just like all over Western Europe.

Why do people still take this lying down? I wonder about that sometimes. Maybe they feel that their votes don't matter and have resigned into a state of quiet apathy. Since many are dependent upon government support and being branded a "bigot" could cause you to lose your livelihood, people still have too much to lose by openly opposing these policies. Such subtle blackmail can be quite effective in suppressing dissent. This could, however, change rapidly in the event of a serious economic downturn. Another crucial element is confusion. People are deliberately kept in the dark by the media and the authorities regarding the full scale of what they are facing. Combined with Muslim violence and intimidation of critics, we have a climate of fear and confusion. People who are scared and confused can be easily controlled.

I've recently been re-reading the books of American evolutionary biologist Jared Diamond, especially Guns, Germs, and Steel. He has some points, but his most important flaw is his complete failure to explain how the Greater Middle East went from being a global center of civilization, which it was in ancient times, to being a global center of anti-civilization. This was not caused by smallpox or because zebras are more difficult to domesticate than water buffaloes. It was caused by Islam. Diamond, with his emphasis on historical materialism, fails to explain the rise of the West and especially why English, not Arabic, Chinese or Mayan, became the global lingua franca. What's so special about those rainy and foggy islands?

As Australian author Keith Windschuttle told a New Zealand audience, "The concepts of free enquiry and free expression and the right to criticise entrenched beliefs are things we take so much for granted they are almost part of the air we breathe. We need to recognise them as distinctly Western phenomena." He warns that the survival of this great achievement now depends entirely "on whether we have the intelligence to understand their true value and the will to face down their enemies."

No other civilization on earth ever created an equivalent of the European university system. One of the most important reasons why Europe surpassed China during the early modern age is more political freedom and free speech. The reason why English became the dominant language is because Britain and its offspring enjoyed great political liberty even by Western standards, and a corresponding economic dynamism.

Probably no empire in world history has been more benevolent than the British Empire, yet a report from February 2008 recommended that patriotism should be avoided in school lessons because British history is "morally ambiguous." I suppose Islamic history isn't, with almost 1400 years of brutal Jihad warfare on several continents?

I'm sure the British are being told that the ongoing mass immigration is a result of their "colonial history." I live in a country with no colonial history, yet we are still subject to mass immigration. We are also being told that we should allow Pakistani or Nigerian flags to celebrate our Constitution Day because this will be "good for integration." This has nothing to do with colonialism. So what does it have to do with? Well, I'm starting to wonder whether it has something to do with the Western love affair with free speech and political liberty. Those who desire a world where society is regulated and everybody does what the authorities tell them to do fear this Western preference for political self-determination.

If we look at the West during the past thousand years, we have generally enjoyed an unusually high degree of freedom and power sharing. This has been the case more in some periods and countries than in others, but in the big scheme of things this remains true. However, although this arrangement has been good for our civilization as a whole, some of our elites apparently are jealous of the more authoritarian system in other cultures. They want to turn the West into a "normal," meaning more corrupt and less free, civilization, aided by the forces of globalization. We are witnessing rising nepotism, and perhaps those at the top desire this.

The political elites no longer believe in stupid things such as borders, cultures and national sovereignty. Islam upsets their world-view, so they ignore it and move on with their project of globalization, anyway. The most hardcore Leftists actively side with Islam because its hatred of the West and its concept of a global umma coincide with their own globalist outlook. Yes, I know that Socrates stated "I am not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world," but I don't think he meant it quite as literally as Western elites do now. Socrates didn't have an entire village of Muslims transplanted to his street during the space of a single generation, and he didn't have his daughters or female relatives raped by Muslims in his own country.

Our traditional freedoms were the result of a specific culture, developed over centuries of hard struggles. Maybe other cultures have to go through similar struggles of their own to achieve this, and some will perhaps never be able to do so. We should protect our freedoms at home before we try to export them, and we should protect them by preserving the European-derived culture which created them.

Our enemies, internal and external, want to destroy the Western world because we represent liberty, and they want to destroy Britain in particular because it gave birth to the most powerful pro-liberty culture within the Western tradition. I hope the British can regain their strength and throw off their traitor class, but they need to do so soon. We cannot allow the greatest nation in human history to be destroyed by the planet's most barbaric cultures. The British people, like their Dutch, German, Italian, Spanish and Danish counterparts, have every right to desire self-determination and self-preservation, and limit or even completely halt immigration as they see fit to ensure this. Those who say otherwise are evil, and need to be exposed as such. The Western world is under attack by a global Islamic Jihad. To support continued mass immigration of Muslims in this situation should be regarded as high treason, and punished as such.

See also:
Creating a European Indigenous People’s Movement, 6 April 2008

Fjordman is a noted Norwegian blogger who has written for many conservative web sites. He used to have his own Fjordman Blog in the past, but it is no longer active.

Tuesday, June 3, 2008

Christian Preachers Face Arrest in England

From The Telegraph
By David Harrison

A police community support officer ordered two Christian preachers to stop handing out gospel leaflets in a predominantly Muslim area of Birmingham (England).

Warned: Arthur Cunningham [left] and Joseph Abraham

The evangelists say they were threatened with arrest for committing a "hate crime" and were told they risked being beaten up if they returned. The incident will fuel fears that "no-go areas" for Christians are emerging in British towns and cities, as the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester, claimed in The Sunday Telegraph this year.

Arthur Cunningham, 48, and Joseph Abraham, 65, both full-time evangelical ministers, have launched legal action against West Midlands Police, claiming the officer infringed their right to profess their religion.

Mr Abraham said: "I couldn't believe this was happening in Britain. The Bishop of Rochester was criticised by the Church of England recently when he said there were no-go areas in Britain but he was right; there are certainly no-go areas for Christians who want to share the gospel."

Last night, Christian campaigners described the officer's behaviour as "deeply alarming".

The preachers, both ministers in Birmingham, were handing out leaflets on Alum Rock Road in February when they started talking to four Asian youths.

A police community support officer (PCSO) interrupted the conversation and began questioning the ministers about their beliefs.

They said when the officer realised they were American, although both have lived in Britain for many years, he launched a tirade against President Bush and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr Cunningham said: "I told him that this had nothing to do with the gospel we were preaching but he became very aggressive.

"He said we were in a Muslim area and were not allowed to spread our Christian message. He said we were committing a hate crime by telling the youths to leave Islam and said that he was going to take us to the police station."

The preacher refused to give the PCSO his address because he felt the officer's manner was "threatening and intimidating".

The ministers claim he also advised them not to return to the area. As he walked away, the PCSO said: "You have been warned. If you come back here and get beaten up, well you have been warned".

West Midlands Police, who refused to apologise, said the incident had been "fully investigated" and the officer would be given training in understanding hate crime and communication.

Sunday, May 11, 2008

A Schism over Shari'a in the Church of England

From American Thinker
David J. Rusin

The debate over the trajectory of the Western sociopolitical system and its strained relations with Islam is the most pivotal of our time, as approaches decided upon today will impact billions not yet born. Two prelates in the ever more fractious Church of England provide a microcosm of this discourse.

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and Bishop of Rochester Michael Nazir-Ali have emerged as central combatants in the dispute between two fundamentally opposed models of social organization: multiculturalism and universalism. The former bestows equal standing upon different cultures in the public square. The latter bestows equal standing upon individuals who wield a common set of rights and responsibilities. Which system prevails will ultimately determine the level of danger that homegrown Islamists pose to Britain, Europe, and the broader West.

Nazir-Ali believes that Britain's campaign to reconstitute itself as a multicultural society has failed, and he explained why in a January 6 op-ed. By emphasizing differences over common values, his country has promoted alienation among Muslims, many of whom are "living as separate communities, continuing to communicate in their own languages, and having minimum need for building healthy relationships with the majority." Since segregation breeds extremism, Islamist-dominated "no-go areas" now dot the map.

Indeed, as Britain increasingly accommodates the strictures of Islamic law in both welfare and finance, the radicalization of its Muslims continues apace. According to a 2006 Channel 4 survey, nearly one-quarter see the 7/7 London bombings as justifiable. A 2007 Policy Exchange poll found that 40% of Muslims under 24 prefer to be governed by Shari'a, while a shocking 36% believe that apostates from Islam should be "punished by death." Extremist views are far more common among younger Muslims, portending trouble on the horizon.

The death threats that followed Nazir-Ali's essay only bolstered his thesis. "The irony is that I had similar threats when I was a bishop in Pakistan," he noted, "but I never thought I would have them here." The rejection of reason is particularly disturbing to this learned man: "If you disagree, that must be met by counterarguments, not by trying to silence people. It was a threat not just to me, but to my family. ... It gave me sleepless nights."

Rowan Williams was likewise losing sleep -- over the "damage" done by Nazir-Ali's frank assessment of multicultural pieties. Speaking to the BBC on February 7, he ignited a firestorm of his own by suggesting that the official acceptance of some facets of Shari'a not only "seems unavoidable," but could actually improve social cohesion. To Williams, the idea that "there's one law for everybody and that's all there is to be said, and anything else that commands your loyalty or allegiance is completely irrelevant in the processes of the courts -- I think that's a bit of a danger."

In one sentence, Britain's most influential cleric effectively discarded the primary achievement of Western civilization: a system in which all live as equals before a single standard of law. The logical consequences of his worldview were underscored by Melanie Phillips: "If there is no one law, there is no one national identity and therefore no society but instead a set of warring fiefdoms with their own separate jurisdictions."

Williams and Nazir-Ali also illustrate how one's preferred method of social organization -- multiculturalism or universalism -- frequently boils down to whether one acknowledges the righteousness of the Western enterprise. Preoccupation with the real and imagined crimes of the West can serve as a gateway to Islamist apologetics. And the archbishop is Exhibit A.

Regarding the free market, Williams sees only suffering: "Every transaction in the developed economies of the West can be interpreted as an act of aggression against the economic losers in the worldwide game." And America's role on the international stage is, of course, the height of iniquity. In contrast, he often excuses horrors committed in the name of Islam. While condemning terrorism, he has suggested that terrorists can "have serious moral goals." He also laments the challenges faced by Middle Eastern Christians, but portrays them as victims of Western policies rather than of the Islamists threatening their lives.

Unlike Rowan Williams, Michael Nazir-Ali witnessed the realities of Shari'a law and radical Islam firsthand as a young Pakistani. These experiences eventually led him to Britain's shores -- and to an admiration for the freedoms nurtured in the West. Like Magdi Allam, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im, Salman Rushdie, and Ibn Warraq, the future bishop escaped the stifling oppression of Shari'a to become an outspoken champion of Western values.

Shari'a "would be in tension with the English legal tradition on questions like monogamy, provisions for divorce, the rights of women, custody of children, laws of inheritance and of evidence," Nazir-Ali said in response to Williams' BBC interview. "This is not to mention the relation of freedom of belief and of expression to provisions for blasphemy and apostasy." His statement reveals a keen understanding of the two groups that suffer an inferior status under Shari'a: women and non-Muslims.

Not satisfied with abstract musings, Nazir-Ali applies this knowledge to contemporary problems. In March he quizzed a Home Office minister on whether women threatened by forced marriages are being adequately protected, and last year he urged Muslim leaders to condemn violence against apostates. Williams, in contrast, has said little about either issue. The bishop of Rochester has also criticized amplification of the call to prayer, demanded that Britain carefully scrutinize foreign imams, and spoken out against face-covering veils -- even as Williams insists that an attempt to limit them would be "politically dangerous."

Nazir-Ali contends that the Western ethos did not arise by chance, but proceeded from "the Bible's teaching that we have equal dignity and freedom because we are all made in God's image." Islamist encroachments are therefore symptoms of a more fundamental problem. "The real danger to Britain today is the spiritual and moral vacuum that has occurred for the last 40 or 50 years. When you have such a vacuum something will fill it," he recently warned. "Do the British people really want to lose that rooting in the Christian faith that has given them everything they cherish -- art, literature, architecture, institutions, the monarchy, their value system, their laws?"

Only time will tell.

Historians may one day look back on these two prelates and the church they serve -- a body faced with plummeting attendance and approaching disestablishment -- as symbols of the early twenty-first-century discourse over the future of the West. For now, Michael Nazir-Ali and Rowan Williams illuminate the diverging paths before us: one paved with an ardent defense of Western liberties, the other with a nihilism that leads inexorably to dhimmitude.

David J. Rusin is a research associate at Islamist Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum. He holds a Ph.D. in Physics and Astronomy from the University of Pennsylvania. Please feel free to contact him at

Sunday, February 10, 2008


Real Clear Politics

The United Kingdom, from common language and shared heritage, offers us our best window into what is happening in Europe. This is especially so when we try to come to grips -- if we have the courage to do so -- with the historically sudden irruption, and rapid spread, of Islam across Europe.

There are parallel developments in all the nations on the Continent: high immigration rates from Islamic countries, comparatively high birth rates among that immigrant population, and the radicalization of their young in Wahabi mosques financed by the oil wealth of Arabia. But for many English-speaking Canadians, it is the British experience that brings the phenomenon home.

The demographic issue is at the centre of much controversy. There can be little dispute over the statistical facts, which are quite dramatic, and as exhilarating from an Islamist point of view, as they are ominous for those who fear the loss of everything associated with western civilization. For, owing to the prior triumph of the leftist "multicultural" ideology, which holds that one "culture" is as good as another, and therefore it is wrong to preserve our own way of life, there is considerable opposition to discussing these facts.

We have seen this in Canada, where journalists Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant have been hauled before "human rights tribunals" -- kangaroo courts in which defendants are stripped of all the traditional protections of court law, and where judgments may be passed against them by people with no legal qualifications on the basis of whim and hearsay.

Mr. Steyn, in particular, stands accused of having openly discussed demographic questions. Mr. Levant stands accused of having published materials the mainstream media had been cowed into suppressing by the fear of Islamist violence.

In both cases, the journalists are being prosecuted by Muslims who advocate the imposition of Shariah law, but are using an apparatus that was designed by the Left for the persecution of those expressing right-wing views.

The British system works differently, and the media in Britain remain more robust than the media in Canada, and willing to report things that would be studiously ignored in a Canadian newsroom. On the other hand, by sheer force of numbers, and the intimidation value of several Islamist atrocities on London's streets, the "fear factor" in Britain is much higher, and the Labour government has proved much more responsive to Islamist demands.

The chief, and most consistent Islamist demand, is for the imposition of Shariah law, at least for Muslims, but ideally by the whole state. In fact, many Shariah courts are already operating informally in Britain, dealing mostly with routine civil questions of marriage, divorce, inheritance, and financial disputes, but sometimes with crime. For instance, a Shariah court in the London district of Woolwich was allowed recently -- apparently with the co-operation of police -- to pass judgment on unnamed Somali youths in a knifing incident. (The assailants were released in return for an apology to their victim.)

In various other ways, Shariah is being recognized, semi-formally. For instance, although bigamy remains nominally a crime in Britain, the Labour government has approved new social provisions by which extra welfare payments, council housing privileges, and tax benefits may be claimed by polygamous households, and the cash benefits to which the extra wives are now entitled may be paid directly into the account of their husband.

At a higher level, the (Anglican) Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, publicly called this week for the recognition of "some form of" Shariah law for Muslims in Britain, and said it should be given equal status with parliamentary law. While Archbishop Williams has a long history of muddled pronouncements, and is widely observed to be emotionally unstable, the strength of his office is now engaged on the Islamist side.

Muslim groups such as the Ramadhan Foundation responded luke-warmly, welcoming the suggestion but criticizing the archbishop for having failed to punish his Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, who is under police protection after recently suggesting that various Muslim districts in Britain had become "no-go areas" for people who are not Muslim. (The Anglican Archbishop of York is also under fire, for making remarks critical of radical Islam.)

The saddest part of this, is that so many "moderate" Muslims emigrated to Britain (as to Canada) expressly to escape from societies in which Shariah law is normative. And what they are learning now, is that, thanks to the triumph of multiculturalism in the West, "you can run but you can't hide."

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Harry Potter and the Sword of the Caliphate

Churchill's Parrot, a superb blog that keeps the Churchillian spirit alive and brings the Greatest Briton's wisdom and grasp of history to bear on the issues of our day, has published an excellent reflection on threats to British liberty, sovereignty, and indeed, to the very survival of the British nation.

Charlie, the blog's author, has very kindly granted us permission to reprint this important post:

In times of national peril, Sir Winston Churchill often conjured references from Great Britain’s prodigious literary heritage to stir the patriotic passions of the British people and rally them to defend their homeland and all it stood for.

Modern Britons, however, are much too cosmopolitan and enlightened to be moved by the hackneyed melodrama of Shakespeare, Dickens, and Scott. They require literary stimuli of a far more sophisticated and compelling nature. Therefore, in an effort to rouse and rally Britons to get up off their duffs and confront the national peril at present – Islamic Usurpation of all things British in Britain – allow us to reference a more contemporary jewel of Brit Lit: Harry Potter.

We are unaware of the politics of J.K. Rowling, authoress of the Harry Potter book series. Nonetheless, in the most recent Potter film based upon her book, The Order of the Phoenix, she provides a near perfect allegory for the slow suicide which Britain is currently in the process of committing. In the story, Harry, our young wizard hero, finds his beloved school of magic taken over by a corrupt government entity, The Ministry of Magic. The Ministry’s first order of business is to gut the school’s Defense against the Dark Arts program wherein it had prepared students to defend themselves against the very real evils they may well encounter in their future magical exploits. Accompanying this effort is the Ministry’s campaign to discredit and silence Harry and all others who have personally fought those very real evils and who seek to warn their contemporaries of the gathering storm. In this way the Ministry is serving to clear the path for the evil overlord of the dark forces so that he might re-enter the wizarding world at the time of his choosing and take full control with nary a peep of resistance.

That is fiction. Here is reality. British educators are dutifully removing references to Sir Winston Churchill, Adolph Hitler, and the Holocaust from their curricula. The British government seeks to eradicate terms such as "war on terror" and "Islamic extremism" and “London is a battlefield” from political discourse. And The Ministry of Justice is busily hounding those few brave souls seeking - at their own risk - to warn of the gathering storm. One such brave soul on our radar screen (and the radar screen’s of an ever-increasing many) is a young blogger named Paul Ray, otherwise known as Lionheart.

“Britain is burning, Britain is burning, and America is next,”
declared Lionheart in a recent interview on Political Vindication Radio. “My government is in fear. My people are in fear of Muslims. That’s no way for us to be living. That’s not how I’m going to live anyway. I’d rather die who I am as a person standing up for what’s right rather than bow down and be a weak pathetic little coward.” Such earnest passion is reminiscent of the melodrama mentioned earlier, and thus proves irritating to the modern sensibilities of contemporary British authorities. In fact, for statements such as these, Paul Ray – Lionheart – is to be arrested by the British government.

And yet he roars on.

“In the north of England, you had twelve year old little girls being targeted by gangs,” Lionheart explains. “You’ve got shopping centers with Muslim security guards and men spotting the little children. Then the runners who go in and ply the little children with money and cigarettes and whatever. And then you’ve got taxi drivers that take them away. And then they ply them with drugs and then they start trafficking them amongst their Muslim friends. People have known about all this for a while but the actual exposure’s only come out recently because the government wanted to keep it quiet. The police didn’t want to do anything about it for fear of ‘breaching community cohesion.’ So our young children are being forced to endure this degradation, this depravity.”

Because of cases such as these, and many others, most of which are happening in and around his hometown of Luton, England, Lionheart is – to put it mildly - very angry. His blog has been a means of venting his rage and making the public aware of the gathering storm.

“We’re not calling people to go marching in the streets killing people,” explained Lionheart. “All we’re doing is saying to people, look wake up, you know. Wake up! Telling our neighbors, telling our friends, wake up. Look at what’s surrounding us. And the internet is that battle line. That is our war front at this moment in time. Who knows when all that’s going to change?”

Well if the British Ministry of Justice has its way, it will change very soon.

“If you look at my blog, I haven’t said come on let’s kill these people. All I’ve done is written the truth. Now they’re trying to silence me.”

Now that the word is out however, across the blogosphere and across Blog Talk Radio, silencing Mr. Ray’s lion heart may prove more difficult than the Ministry had originally hoped.

Speaking on behalf of “Keyboard Warriors” the world over, Political Vindication host, Shane Borgess, assured Lionheart, “You’ve got a lot of people that are dedicated to the battle you’re fighting. It doesn’t matter that we’re on different continents my friend.” (Not surprising that our American friends are drawn to Mr. Ray’s righteous defiance.)

“People can be complacent now about what’s happening,” continued Lionheart. “But you’ve only got to look at the facts now to think ‘what’s it going to be like in twenty years or thirty years for my children, my grand children? What are they going to face if we don’t do something now?’ In America you’ve got thirty or forty years to wait. In Great Britain, it’s happening on the ground now. Our communities are being overrun.”

For now, Mr. Ray is taking refuge in America; perhaps the first of many Britons soon to do so. When a caller during the program posited the question, “Where do you think the final stand is going to be,” host Borgess proudly chimed in, “It’ll be America again, baby!”

At this juncture, it appears that will quite likely be the case. But what of Britain? Has she truly abdicated her sovereignty to the European Union, her soul to Islam, and her defense to the United States? For what reason? Fear? Apathy? Cultural self-hatred? Wither the isle of Blackstone, of Burke, of Churchill who, when staring into the maw of Nazi dominion spat:

“Nations which went down fighting, rose again. But those who surrendered tamely, were finished. If this long island story of ours is to end at last, let it end only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground.”

Is Lionheart all that remains of this? We hold fast to the belief that this is not the case. We hold fast to the belief that righteous British patriotic passions merely lay dormant at present, lulled to sleep by the lullaby of popular culture. Would that we could convince that culture to join Lionheart in crying, “Wake up! Look at what’s surrounding us.”

Which brings us back to Miss Rowling’s Harry Potter. We realize Miss Rowling has retired the series, but one last book/film combo may just be the ticket. Our recommended title:“Harry Potter and the Sword of the Caliphate.” With the full force of the Potter juggernaut behind it, this message would reach billions worldwide and might even stoke the passion for freedom yet smoldering in the hearts of Britons and liberty lovers around the globe. (Note to Miss Rowling: For a small portion of the proceeds, I am happy to offer my services in composing the original manuscript.)

Until such time (we advise not holding your breath), it remains for we bloggers to sound the warning bells.

“The battle takes many fronts now,” Lionheart explained. “We’re living in the 21st century. The computer, the Internet is a medium and it’s a forum to educate people to the truth that surrounds them.”

Let us continue to do so my fellow bloggers. And let us fight any and all ideologies and institutions that would silence our efforts to honor Sir Winston’s clarion call:

"We must never cease to proclaim in fearless tones the great principles of freedom and the rights of man which are the joint inheritance of the English-speaking world and which through Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, the Habeas Corpus, trial by jury, and the English common law find their most famous expression in the American Declaration of Independence.”



P.S. We highly recommend you listen to the entirety of Mr. Ray’s interview on Political Vindication radio from January 17, 2008.
Also on The Gathering Storm radio program from January 18, 2008
Mr. Ray’s blog, of course - Lionheart - also a must visit at

Reprinted with permission of Churchill's Parrot