The persecution of Christians for their beliefs is no novelty. It’s been going on for almost two thousand years. In Muslim countries, especially, one expects that life will be difficult for those who have professed Christ as their savior.But reading these stories from Algeria made me wonder how the EuroMed initiative is going to be squared with the laws and customs that are considered the norm in North Africa. How are we to “harmonize” the laws of Libya with the laws of the EU?
Here’s the first story, from ANSAmed:
Further Investigation Asked in Convert Trial
Algiers, May 27 — The court in Tiaret, in Algeria’s southwest, has asked for a more in-depth investigation in the trial of an Algerian woman who converted to Christianity four years ago. “The judge could have closed the case of Habiba K. today, given the fact that the crime is not valid,” lawyer Khalfoun told ANSA. The woman is accused of having “practiced an unauthorized non-Muslim worship” and the prosecutor has asked for a three-year prison sentence.
The second story is similar, also from ANSAmed:
- - - - - - - - -
Proselytism Trial Against 6 Algerian Christians
Tiaret (Algeria), May 27 — A trial against six Algerian Christian Protestants accused of proselytism and of having practiced religion in a non-authorised place was opened at the tribunal in Tiaret, 300 km west of Algiers. All six people were arrested after having gone out of a building where they had met to pray. Prosecutor Aissaoui asked for two years of imprisonment for the accused. The trial will be resumed in a week. In Tiaret, a town with some 20,000 inhabitants, the Christian community comprises between 70 and 100 people, according to the accused.
The woman from the first story may face three years in prison for her chosen religion. The six people in the second story may face two years for publicly praying to someone other than Allah.
When the time comes for the Euro-Mediterranean merger, how will these practices be reconciled with European norms? How can the culture of Algeria be aligned with that of Europe?
Well, the ground is being prepped for the change already, at least in England. Consider this article from This is Wiltshire:
A teenage motorist was told to remove an England flag from his car by a police officer because it could be offensive to immigrants.Ben Smith, 18, was driving back home to Ingram Road in Melksham on Thursday evening after filling up with petrol, when the officer stopped him on a routine patrol.
He checked the tax disc and tyres on his Vauxhall Corsa but when he noticed the flag of St George on the parcel shelf he told Mr Smith to take it down.
Mr Smith, who works for G Plan Upholsterers on Hampton Park West, said: “He saw the flag and said it was racist towards immigrants and if I refused to take it down I would get a £30 fine.
“I laughed because I thought he was joking, but then I realised he was serious so I had to take it down straight away. I thought it was silly — it’s my country and I want to show my support for my country.”
[…]
PC Dave Cooper, of Chippenham Road Policing Unit, said he had never come across an officer asking someone to remove an England flag from their car because it could be racist.
He added: “It all depends on the context of a stop. If they are going past a lot of Polish people, for instance, and abusing them, then we possibly would ask them to take the flag down.”
Polish people, eh?
How likely are Poles in the UK to get upset by the English flag? Really: how likely?
Or is it more probable that certain people of the South Asian persuasion are going to take offense? Adherents, that is, of a religion that we dare not name?
As you can see from the photo, the English flag consists of the emblem of Saint George — a red cross on a white background. Is it a coincidence that the cross is considered offensive and “racist”?
Make no mistake: the subjects of Great Britain are being prepared for their integration into Eurabia.
When the time comes, they’ll be ready.
Hat tips: For the Algerian stories, insubria; for the English flag story, AMDG.
13 comments:
Crosses- the removal of the "offending cross of Christ" is nothing new.
The most recent - here in California - was its removal from the official seal of Los Angeles.
There was no outcry from Christian leaders here.
My Lutheran Church leaders say words like:
"There will always be a remnant...don't worry..."
Good thing the Black Regiment (the pastors who signed the Declaration of Independence) and the likes of Pastor Peter Mulenberg (he became a military officer at the behest of George Washington) were around during the American Revolution.
We may not have had one!
The Christian leaders of today are afraid of engaging the "enemy".
Isn't this common nowadays? Sweden has banned anyone from wearing or flying their flag because the cross might offend muslims. Over here in the US, the confederate battle flag is torn down and children aren't allowed to wear it in school etc. (one of the interesting stories of the confederate flag is it's actually based on the cross of St. George--are we seeing something in common here?)
Only conquered nations lose their flag or the right to fly it. This should tell us something. This is a deeply primordial, symbolic, emotional issue. This isn't done for no reason. There is a plan behind it.
"In Muslim countries, especially, one expects that life will be difficult for those who have professed Christ as their savior."
To narrowminded, I must say; I'd have expected a broader view, Baron.
The proper wording should have been:"In Muslim countries, especially, one expects that life will be difficult for those who do not submit to islam."
It's not about christians, it's about any non-muslim.
R. Hartman --
I disagree. You've reversed the implied syllogism.
I said that in Muslim countries, Christians are likely to face particular persecution. That does not exclude nor imply the exclusion of the persecution of other groups of non-Muslims in those countries.
I was writing about Christians, so I focused on their persecution. Had I been writing about Jews, or Hindus, or Baha'is, I would have mentioned their persecution at the hands of Islam.
This knee-jerk insistence on "inclusiveness" for everyone is a preoccupation of the Left, and I will not engage in it.
It is the virus that has infected our culture and caused the deadly disease known as Multiculturalism.
"This knee-jerk insistence on "inclusiveness" for everyone is a preoccupation of the Left, and I will not engage in it.
It is the virus that has infected our culture and caused the deadly disease known as Multiculturalism."
Well played Baron.
It is unbelievable that so many people do think that a problem is only a problem when it attacks others than the sons of the devil, may them be Christians, Europeans or Westerners.
They are all a bunch of Nazis you know! And a such we should not look at the Christians in Darfur but to the Lalala-la's of the Eastern Syrian desert.
The last ones's Civilisation has giving so much to the Human Kind that we should never forget them!
When the time comes for the Euro-Mediterranean merger, how will these practices be reconciled with European norms?
Only one of two ways:
A.) Submission to Islam (i.e., dhimmitude)
or ...
B.) Forcing Islam to expunge its bigoted xenophobic hate speech from the Koran.
In my best estimation, either path will eventually lead to Total War. Regardless of their governments' lily-livered subservience to all things Muslim, Westerners will not tolerate full-scale subjugation by Islam.
Should Western governments finally sprout a set, they will quickly find out that only overwhelming force of arms will incur the least alteration of Islamic doctrine.
The changes required to make Islam compatible with Western civilization are so profound that it will render the Koran an alien document. Without wishing to seem too bloodthirsty, crushing the entire MME (Muslim Middle East) beneath a military jackboot will be far easier than coercing Muslims to rewrite the Koran.
Ergo, my continued predictions of a Muslim holocaust.
Remember:
ISLAM WOULDN'T HAVE IT ANY OTHER WAY
I'll just add that it's a mite curious how Danish Muslims aren't agitating for removal of the cross from Denmark's Dannebrog, their national flag. It is far more conspicuous and widely flown than Britain's St. George's Cross.
Being one of the oldest flags to be flown continuously over a given nation, I can only imagine the reaction of stalwart Danes to such a rude demand. One could easily imagine such an attempt at dhimmification leading to the wholesale expulsion of Muslims from Denmark.
Now, contrast that notion to what is going on in England. What in Hell is it that has surgically removed the backbone of British political leadership? Please don't feed me the same old Multiculturalist pap. There is some other much more deeply seated malaise that is corroding Limey dignity.
Be it self-loathing, lingering colonial apologism or what-have-you, once stout British vertabrae are being turned into poorly set aspic and it is nothing short revolting to watch. If the 7-7 atrocity didn't put any lead in their collective pencil, I dread to think what it will take to do so.
Let the Danes send an armed contingent through Muslim neighborhoods and hang the Danish flag at every intersection.
As to the UK policeman--I doubt that he's typical. This story is all over the blogosphere!
Shut down the pernicious EU before it's too late.
“He saw the flag and said it was racist towards immigrants and if I refused to take it down I would get a £30 fine."
Now I don't know how the system works in the UK, but here in the US if an officer asked me to remove a flag (American, Confederate, Gadsden or whatever) I'd take the ticket, because then I'd have standing before the court to appeal the ticket on constitutional grounds thus actually doing something to stop such a stupid and clearly illegal law.
Furthermore, that UK cop has just justified the inaction of his fellow citizens if he should find himself on the wrong end of a beat down by a group of "disaffected youths".
Regarding inclusiveness. Why stop at other religions? What about atheists, gays, and .... where was I?
Scene 7 from the Monty Python movie Life of Brian:
JUDITH: I do feel, Reg, that any Anti-Imperialist group like ours must reflect such a divergence of interests within its power-base.
REG: Agreed. Francis?
FRANCIS: Yeah. I think Judith's point of view is very valid, Reg, provided the Movement never forgets that it is the inalienable right of every man--
STAN: Or woman.
FRANCIS: Or woman... to rid himself--
STAN: Or herself.
FRANCIS: Or herself.
REG: Agreed.
FRANCIS: Thank you, brother.
STAN: Or sister.
FRANCIS: Or sister. Where was I?
REG: I think you'd finished.
FRANCIS: Oh. Right.
Look to what Wikipedia has to say about the International Criminal Tribunal:
"Critics have questioned whether the Tribunal exacerbates tensions rather than promotes reconciliation, as is claimed by Tribunal supporters. Polls show a generally negative reaction to the Tribunal among the Serb and Croat public. The majority of Croats and Serbs doubt the tribunal's integrity and question the tenability of its legal procedures (although the Serbs's and Croats's opinions on the court are almost always exactly the opposite with regard to the cases that involve both parties). On the other hand, Kosovo Albanians and Bosnian Muslims have frequently expressed their high regard for the court and the trust in its impartiality."
They are not biased against Europeans, are they?
This is just casual, isn't it?
Oh by, I think I'm going mad or something.
Baron:
"When the time comes for the Euro-Mediterranean merger, how will these practices be reconciled with European norms?"
Frankly? it will harmonize perfectly with what EU wants the "norms" to be...
The secular authority of the EUrocrats will brook no sovereignty other than their own. The Algerian law of "unauthorized religions" is right up the EUrocrats' alley, isn't it?
The notion that the crosses prevalent in so many of the EU member states' flags being "offensive to Muslims", and therefore not "authorized" for public display is a bonus.
The EU is literally playing poker with the Devil here.
They reckon that they can use the imposition of "top-down" de facto sharia as an intermediate step to declaring ALL religion and ALL other sovereignties as "beyond the Pale", and probably figure that when the time comes, they can de-legitimize Islam and sharia as well.
I imagine this is much the same kind of thinking that prompted the industrialists and financiers to sponsor Adolf Hitler.
That's why I believe the only TRUE threat of Islamic genocide will come from the European Left, when they deem it is time to send in their secular "Man on Horseback" to overthrow their erstwhile Radical Islamist puppets.
The same broad thing happenned when the Nazis started getting their "uber-asses" kicked out of the USSR and all their U-boats started disappearing on patrol, while the UK was getting loaded down to the Plimsoll marks with American and Canadian troops and materiel.
Goebbels' rhetoric increasingly turned towards "saving European Kultur" from the "traditional Eastern hordes" and us "Cultural Barbarians" from across the seas.
(EVERYONE knows that he was talking about the Canadians, there).
When,(and if), the Euro MSM start babbling the same rot, and seem to have re-discovered "traditional European Values", you'll know that very dark days are soon ahead.
And after the bloodbath, they'll (once again),blame the entire thing on outmoded trbalism and religion, and outlaw God altogether.
Once again, I'm awe-struck at how clearly Orwell saw the blueprint.
"The old civilizations claimed that they were founded on love or justice. Ours is founded upon hatred. In our world there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph, and self-abasement. Everything else we shall destroy everything. Already we are breaking down the habits of thought which have survived from before the Revolution. We have cut the links between child and parent, and between man and man, and between man and woman...There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy. There will be no art, no literature, no science. When we are omnipotent we shall have no more need of science. There will be no distinction between beauty and ugliness. There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed."
Bilgeman: Frankly? it will harmonize perfectly with what EU wants the "norms" to be...
The secular authority of the EUrocrats will brook no sovereignty other than their own. The Algerian law of "unauthorized religions" is right up the EUrocrats' alley, isn't it?
Blast your scuppers, Bilgeman, always trotting out alternate scenarios that require actual thought to process!
Fortunately, we remain in rather full agreement here. One way or another, the EU's course heads straight back to their much-adored and time honored charnel house. These elitist gits just cannot bear to put down their Champagne and caviar long enough to think through what happens after de facto shari'a law is installed across the land.
It becomes increasingly difficult to distinguish between the EUSSR's apparatchiks and Islam's terrorists in terms of who is most determined to destroy Western civilization.
One thing is guaranteed, those foppish dilettants in Brussels are in for a big surprise when they try to rein in the barbarians that they have so conveniently allowed to crash Europe's gates. Here's hoping that, when the time comes, all of them get strung up like a set of cheap Christmas lights.
Post a Comment
All comments are subject to pre-approval by blog admins.
Gates of Vienna's rules about comments require that they be civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum. For more information, click here.
Users are asked to limit each comment to about 500 words. If you need to say more, leave a link to your own blog.
Also: long or off-topic comments may be posted on news feed threads.
To add a link in a comment, use this format:
<a href="http://mywebsite.com">My Title</a>
Please do not paste long URLs!
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.