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?
Go over to The Brussels Journal for the rest of the article, and for Fjordman’s source links.
56 comments:
Western society has been weakened by the leftists to the point that this is easy for the Muslims.
If you want to save England, start killing off the commies that are enslaving you. Oh wait, according to the rules of civilization, we have to wait until civilization has already been destroyed before we fight back, lest someone call us racist.
Sorry for speaking out of turn.
The reason Diamond is hopelessly wrong is because he refused to believe in the genetic component of human nature. The blank slate where people are just pots which anything can be poured into, all equal at birth, is simply wrong. What makes Diamond's refusal all the more hilarious is he rejected it not because any science or facts were against this view, but simply because he decided it was an 'evil' viewpoint. Diamond is blinded by his faith in liberalism, like most of the west.
It's obvious why people will put up with the atrocities in the UK. People put up with Stalin's purges, people put up with Mao, people even put up with Pol Pot. Against the organized state, we're all helpless, disorganized individuals. It takes many hands to move a boulder, one person pushing on it no matter how much, or how long, will accomplish exactly nothing. So people truckle down, hope to avoid the knock on the door, hope the gestapo will visit some other apartment today, and hope it will all magically change itself. After all, for the unarmed, unorganized, and unrepresented (no majority-white nation gives a damn about its own white majority or passes any policy in its interest)--what else is there but to huddle, hide, and hope?
When conditions worsen, when the economy collapses, or crime reaches the levels of south africa, nothing will change then either. History has taught us that no matter how bad the tyrant, so long as the army backs him up, and the secret police keep the government and people in terror, so long as the people aren't armed and free speech is banned--there's really nothing we can do.
I don't see the tide turning.
Diamed,
Who is Diamond?
What are you talking about, hopeless? We live in democracies, don't we? We can chart our own courses can't we? The government is responsive to the will of the people isn't it?
In actuality, it would seem that democracies are more despotic than we had ever imagined possible.
I agree with your explicit and implicit points in the post above.
See Fjordman's post, jared diamond, author of guns, germs, and steel. I read it also, and though informative about plants and such, the overall conclusion is ridiculous and ignores everything it can't fit into its liberal agenda box.
While I am in favor of opposing Islam, this article is a mixture of anecdotes. Some are legitimate grievances like the child who was deemed racist for not wanting to be the only English speaker in a group speaking a foreign language. Others are less legitimate - saying you are proud to be British is different from shouting "proud to be British" at someone and "go back to where you came from" which is obviously designed to intimidate and harass.
The attitude of British doctors towards the elderly is reprehensible but the insanity of welfare polygamy is not causing it. I know this post did not say that such was the case directly but the juxtaposition does not seem warranted.
The "no-go-zones" must be challenged and the rights of all people to free expression and freedom of conscience must be fought for but it must be remembered, for practical reasons as well as moral ones, that no matter how inhuman we might find Islam, Muslims themselves are humans. And as troubling as these recounted episodes are, the Muslim population is AT ABSOLUTE BEST only 2.7%! And that assumes that anyone who has not completely and openly renounced Islam is actually a Muslim. There is as little reason to fear Muslims as there is to cave into their demands.
While I am not a Christian those evangelists have the right idea. Engage Muslims in dialog - not appeasement, debate - not submission and win apostates via compassion and logic. With them you can reach the rest of the Muslim world.
Muslim apostates are far more powerful than Muslim terrorists.
Snake Oil -- Muslims in Britain DOMINATE every aspect of life all over Britain. There is no place they cannot control or DOMINATE to Muslim norms.
How, why? Because even though they are small in number, they have the most violent and willing to use violent men. And more young men than any other group.
In a disarmed, pacifistic, often-female and gay dominated place like the UK, the group that does not share those attributes and has young men willing to kill and risk being killed will win. Will dominate. At least in the short run which has been the happy life for Muslims in Britain till now.
Because the elites in Britain are threatened by the lower class natives and want them replaced by a "reliably bribeable" population where welfare payments (will magically appear) generate votes, political support, and blocking of upwardly mobile whites.
The whole point of jailing the 14 year old girl was to show who is boss (Multiracial, multicultural elites and the new aristocracy) and who is the serf (native whites without connections). Muslims, blacks, other minorities are merely the Cossacks or Hessians used to oppress natives in the service of the decadent aristocracy.
Except now we see a global recession/depression forcing matters to a head. No more easy money for welfare/bribes to Muslim supporters. Too much of a threat to white natives who are angry and desperate. Breakdown of law and order and a general violent atmosphere causing young natives to carry knives and soon, predictably, black market guns. Young white natives becoming toughs and violent for their own protection and for mating success (as women absent traditional culture's restrictions on men/women's choices in mates, choose the most masculine).
Did I mention Britain's illegitimacy rate is 50%, most of it due the natives (not Muslims who put great stock in legitimacy).
There are many, many, many violent men being developed in Britain, Muslim and natives alike, who will stop at nothing to achieve ambition. Muslims are a threat and aim to dominate even further. Thats their goal. Their domination creates counter-gangs of natives who aim to reverse the situation through predictable counter violence.
As the government has ceded enforcement, social expectations, and legitimacy. It has nothing left but the riot police and is probably fearing the Army who have men who have also risked death, killing and the possibility of being killed. Who view themselves as honorable upholders of the nation and it's traditions, under trampling of a degraded and degenerate, decadent aristocracy.
This is what Marx would call a pre-revolutionary condition.
Regardless of how politically powerful they are they are still a tiny fraction. You could swamp them with Poles and Chinese (who have values similar to the West) without natives going below the 90% level. Forgetting Christians for a moment (71.6% of the population), the non-religious and those of unspecified religion outnumber Muslims over 8 to 1. A little effort and cooperation could yield vast rewards.
Before 9-11 no one thought that giving religious groups special swimming times and sex-segregation was a good idea. It would not take much to make that the case again.
Britain needs to stand up for apostates at home and abroad and by doing so it could become the capital of Islamic apostasy.
Muslims are outnumbered. So what? Willingness to do violence is much more important than capacity.
You are on to something there Snake. How about the UK tansforms itself into the island for the apostates?
It would take some backbone but... well, never mind. (I'm still reeling from the Enoch Powell vids)
Who the hell started this whole thing and why. That is what I would really like to know. We are not talking ancient history here. This whole mess has come down on the western world over the last 40 years...
I know Fjordman can be tendentious but this article has abandoned even the most basic aspects of research and factual accuracy.
"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."
He didn't have an argument with a bloody foreigner.
The ever excellent Fulham Reactionary reports: "The incident that led to the police investigation occurred last September, at the special needs department of his school, Motherwell College. Jamie had an altercation with an Asian girl, who also had special needs, during the course of which he pushed her. Hardly the most heinous of crimes in any context, you might think, and particularly not when both participants have the mental age of primary school children. However, some unknown person clearly felt otherwise. They placed an advertisement in the local paper, asking for witnesses to the "racial assault", after which the eminently sensible gentlemen of the police force decided that it was worth their while to get involved, and questioned Jamie, prior to charging him with assault. According to his mother, Jamie did not understand the questions that the police were asking him, and simply agreed with every accusation put to him, out of a desire to please his interrogators. She adds that, like many children, he does not actually notice racial differences."
"Jamie's mother asks "how can my son be racist"? A valid question, particularly given that there appears to have been no suggestion that the altercation in the classroom was accompanied by anything indicative of racist attitudes, on the part of either Jamie, or the Asian girl. The answer, of course, is that he is white. As such, he is, in "anti-racist" ideology, presumed guilty of racism, and nothing can prove him innocent. Even though there was no racial element in this incident, the fact that he had a conflict with a non-white person, while being himself guilty of being white, proves, to the "anti-racist" thought policeman, that he had a racist motive for his actions. Because those white devils are all evil racists, you know..."
"nothing can prove him innocent".
As it happens this young man with Downs Syndrome who was victimised by PC was given an apology from the Crown Office. But the damage is done. May he perish in blood and suffering, which is entirely understandable given his history.
Excellent essay from Fjordman and pretty much bang on the money.
This is all part of a deliberate marxist attack to destroy the west. It isn't just about Islamic immigration either but about uncontrolled mass-immigration,which we prefer to call it by its real name: Colonisation.
The reason as to why Fjordman cites the lack of care for the elderly - and I write as someone who had to face this situation with my own family - is because the elderly are made to sell their assets to pay for their healthcare.
This after making national insurance contributions during their productive years only to be told they have to sell their homes and any other assets should they need care.
These assets are then used to fund the quite ridiculous levels of social welfare, especially where immigrants are concenred. Need a house and food and clothes for your family? No problem. Want a community centre for your own people? No problem you got it all gratis, courtesy of taxpayer GB.
But if you're English and you have the temerity to protest about immigration and wish to keep Britain Britain - a nation fought and paid for in blood by your kith and kin - then the state police will be on to you.
I'm a proud BNP supporter. We are the only people who are speaking up for the rights and identity of the British people. Here's what the British stasi did to our people who were endangering the safety of the public by engaging in the deadly activity of handing out party literature on the streets of Liverpool:
British Stasi At Work
This is part of the growing politicisation of the Police, something that shames our nation. You should ask yourself why the British police are being politicised.
Yet when muslims demonstrated and called for "jihad against the European crusaders" they were allowed to march freely through our capital city.
An interesting footnote to the video is that the Police asked the cameraman to stop filming. This in a country where surveillance cameras are in abundance in all our major cities. They just love watching us but they hate it when we watch them. I wonder why?
Fjordman is right: Unless the Brits wake up to what is being done to them, especially through the evil EUSSR, we are finished.
The clock is ticking.
Muslim converts to Christianity are assaulted when leaving services or carrying bibles.
I think a righteous coup by the military is the only hope for the UK.
I find it difficult to support the BNP, df. There is too much with the party's history I don't like. But I understand people's frustrations. If the Conservatives abdicate their responsibilities, voters will seek out other alternatives. I don't understand what the Tories are thinking. Uncontrolled mass immigration will only benefit Labour, in addition to ruin the country.
Every country gets the government it desires and deserves. What is missing from this discussion is how the UK and Europe find themselves in this position. The root cause is that white Europeans have failed to reproduce their own. Birth rates are well below replacement yet a society needs at least a stable population and preferably a growing one. The selfish rejection of parenthood and children requires the importation of people to do the work that the natives don't have the people to do. The tax base must be preserved to make the payments that the natives expect and want.
Fjordman:
"There is too much with the party's history I don't like."
You could say that about other parties too. In fact you could say far worse about the lib/lab/con, all of whom are conspiring to give away British sovereignty without the people's assent.I won't mention illegal wars or the criminal bombing of innocent people in Serbia. Not in detail anyway...
The BNP stand for many more issues other than immigration - important issues such as environment, energy, health care - that the media never report. Only the negative "fascist/nazi/knuckle draggers/racists" Orwellian smears to stereotype the BNP.
"I don't understand what the Tories are thinking."
The tories, just like labour, have sold out their values. They have been infiltrated by marxists, they support mass immigration, islamic immigration (Cameron: "It is we who need to understand muslims more") and of course, the EUSSR. It was the tories through Heath who bound us into the EUSSR, then called the EEC.
"...in addition to ruin the country."
That sir, is I what I now believe honestly and truly is their goal. Over the last 40 years, whole tiers of our society have been systematically ddismantled and destroyed. For example:
Christian values and traditions, notably, the family unit.
Law and order. The criminal is now the victim. US readers may find it hard to believe that if a thief entered my house at night time and I remove him by force then I will be prosecuted or even sued. I could give many more such examples.
Education. Absolutely no discipline in schools and a gradual lowering of educational standards. Children are educated about alien religions and cultures and are brainwashed to regard their own history and culture as abhorrent.
Welfare. It doesn't matter who is in power, the welfare system continues to expand. The levels of taxation are scandalously high but, hey, someone's got to pay for these poor immigrants haven't they?
Immigration. Uncontrolled mass immigration is supported by all parties and many areas now see British people as a minority in their own land.
The spread of cultural marxism with its political correctness, multiculturalism, white self hatred and positive discrimination perpertrated by the media has brainwashed so many people that they are totally unaware of the evil that is being done to them.
You have written some brilliant essays Fjordman, many of them have educated me about the situation Britain and Europe is now in. You have written about AFA many times. In the UK we have UAF and Searchlight, 2 marxist organisations funded by government solely to oppose the only party who speaks out against the muticult lib/lab/con marxist con trick.
Another organisation strangling Britain is Common Purpose and I would urge you to visit this site and watch the video.
Stop Common Purpose
I would be very very interested to read your thoughts on CP and if you think or know of similar organisations at work in scandanavia or other EU nations.
Rumpole:
"Every country gets the government it desires and deserves."
I disagree totally! In the UK the people get the government the media tells them they need.
Birth rate isn't an issue. The Japanese have a rapidly declining birth rate and they'll be fine. The far more greater issue is mass-immigration - colonisation - funded by tax payers who were never asked aor consulted about this invasion of their lands.
You may also wish to note that rising abortion rates and government asking families to reduce the number of children they produced in the 60's and 70's as other factors in what is being done to us.
But birth rates have everything to do with it. If we were reproducing as fast as the Muslims or the Mexicans, or indeed reproducing even above replacement rate, our treasnous leaders would be afraid of US -- not of foreigners and illegal immigrants. We are still the majority in all our countries. Reproducing is our only hope of gaining the electoral heft to stop the immigration madness. We don't even have to keep pace with the unwanted immigrants. Three children per family should do it, because we are starting from a higher base, a majority base. With three children per family, women could still have education and careers. But right now all Western people are reproducing at below replacement rates, at below even two children per family. We need to start putting the fear of God into our leaders. Right now they are saying "Who cares about all those old white people, they are dying off anyways, we don't need to worry about them."
Queen:
"our treasnous leaders would be afraid of US"
Mass uncontrolled immigration has nothing to do with them being afraid of us, our leaders support it because of political and especially economic reasons, i.e. a huge market of cheap labour and welfare dependant people who will vote for whoever gives them influence and money.
The world is over-populated. Mass immigration is contributing significantly to the problem. Engaging in a game of "who can breed the most" is an utterly ridiculous solution for native people to have to resort to. Because I'm not just talking about muslims. Britain is being colonised by people from all over the third world. We simply cannot survive if this mass immigration continues because we cannot out breed them in our own land whilst they are still out breeding us in their native lands and continuing to flood into Britain.
We should not allow mass immigration, we have a right to our own land. If we uphold that right then birth rate becomes an irrelevance just as it is in Japan.
Also, the marxists have attacked and vritually destroyed christian family values in the west. This has led not only to declining birth rates but in marriage rates. Another factor is the high divorce rate, again, another marxist attack.
It's also a bit rich for people in the west to wail about birth rates when abortion (and I mean abortion for no other reason than wanting an abortion) has been carried out legally for the last forty years.
Do you see how this ties in with the political elite calling for women to have less children? Make no mistake about it, what has been done to us for forty years is evil. I just hope one day I will see some of the swine answer for their treason.
Engaging in a game of "who can breed the most" is an utterly ridiculous solution for native people to have to resort to.
Then we die, both as a civilization and as a people. Demography wins in a "democracy." Once the "immigrants" achieve critical mass, they'll be able to outvote you and take over your country without firing a shot. And it'll be permanent, because once in control they'll continue importing their kind into your country and pushing you and yours out. Reproducing is a sign of a nation that wants to live --- not reproducing is a sign of a nation that wants to commit suicide. Which message do you want to send to the world?
We could always reproduce 'like mosquitoes' and then mass immigrate to THEIR countries. Since we're all brothers and diversity is a country's strength, plus I'm sure we'll make a valuable contribution to their economy, why should they object?
"Reproducing is a sign of a nation that wants to live --- not reproducing is a sign of a nation that wants to commit suicide."
They don't want to commit suicide, they just know that, as individuals, they can't outbreed the muslims on their own.
They don't want to commit suicide, they just know that, as individuals, they can't outbreed the muslims on their own.
Someone's got to go first. People follow trends. Why did the Baby Boom happen? People followed what their neighbors were doing, simple as that. Look at the current "baby boom" of Hollywood stars. Julia Roberts had her twins (with fertility drugs)and then all of the sudden, numerous other female stars had to have their twins too (with fertility drugs.)
BTW, The current economic downturn is a blessing in disguise. The globalists won't be able to justify mass immigration in the light of serious unemployment, competition for resources etc. They will have to stop mass immigration or face anarchy and riots in the streets. Already in California, the state's bankruptcy and a formal declaration of water drought have made people face the facts, that we can't support mass immigration anymore. Let's pray the economic crisis gets even worse.
In the quieter moments, when you have a chance to reflect honestly with yourself, you know that the situation is unsustainable and requires an organised resistance, a national liberation struggle. You can't ignore it. It isn't going to go away merely by talking about it. Direct action is required.
Queen,
I'm with Defiant Lion on this one. When he says:
Birth rate isn't an issue. The Japanese have a rapidly declining birth rate and they'll be fine. The far more greater issue is mass-immigration - colonisation...
Birth rates are of course an issue. But the issue of our failure to reproduce is not even in the same ballpark as the population explosion in the Third World. Not even in the ballpark next to that ballpark.
It's all simple math.
With a total fertility rate of 1.5 (i.e. an average of 1.5 kids per woman), this is how a population changes. I assume each generation change to take 25 years, and each person to live 75 years:
100,00% year 0
91,67% year 25
77,08% year 50
57,81% year 75
43,36% year 100
I'm not saying this is not an issue, but even if you would completely ignore the problem for 50 years, you are still fine and can easily change the situation. This is the situation of Japan, as mentioned by Defiant Lion.
However, exponential growth is a wholly different thing. With 4 children per woman the population doubles in every generation, and for the same 25 year intervals we get the following figures: 100%, 200%, 400%; 800%, 1600%.
We find this explosion in e.g. Pakistan and Nigeria. A quadrupling of the population in every 25 years. And this is something entirely created by the West, theis own culture has always been unable to do it. The lib/lab/con/bnp blind moral conformism, see it as a unquestionable moral command to feed this galloping disaster with Western medicine, aid, and improved agriculture to feed an explosion in growth of Muslims in the world.
In 50 years they are yet four times more then they are today, and then it doesn't matter if we are still at 100% or have dropped to 77% (1.5 kids). 400% will sweep the floor with us in either case; even if we get 3 kids per woman and reach 158%. It's all simple math. Exponential growth is explosive and nothing can compare with it.
The only way to stop it is to stop feeding it, but the lib/lab/con/bnp conformism of blind and mechanical Christian ethics commands it to continue. The lib/lab/con/bnp people as so submerged in it that they do not even see it operating and how it is destroying this planet. Typical of the lib/lab/con/bnp paradigm is to never demand anything from foreign countries. It's the paradigm of Christian self-sacrifice taken to absurdity. Even when these people "wake up", the talk is about how WE must increase our birth rates (not of how the exponential growth in Pakistan, Nigeria etc. must be stopped); the talk is about how WE should wean ourselves off oil, instead of suggesting that the oil fields are restored to us to whom they rightfully belong. Etc. As long as this paradigm is in the backbones of people, things will continue to get worse, and at an accelerating pace. Even if Third World immigration would be stopped to all Western countries tomorrow. This is a global problem. And it's a problem all caused by us! And it will explode in our faces during this century, unless we stop this immoral and irresponsible behaviour now!
Anyway, back to the calculations:
With 4 kids per woman and if every spouse is picked from the outside (from your original country), then the population segment quadruples in every 25 years: 100%, 400%, 1600%, 6400%, 25600%.
This is the situation we have for the Muslim population segment in many Western countries. Not all will pick their wife from abroad, but continued immigration is not even included in above figures, so let's say that they even each other out somewhat. At this rate a Muslim population of 6% today will be over 50% in 50 years from now (even if we make 2.1 babies per woman).
Look for example at the table in Wilder's movie Fitna at 10:18 for Muslim growth in Holland. The growth is 367% i 25 years. Almost a quadrupling. How will us having 1.5, 2 or 3 kids have any impact on that? Virtually nothing. The only way to deal with exponential growth is to stop the exponential growth.
To get our birth rates up is a an easy piece of cake compared to this problem. Japan will be fine. But we might be out of business some 50 years ahead.
We find this explosion in e.g. Pakistan and Nigeria. A quadrupling of the population in every 25 years.
Typo: It's a doubling in 25 years. The quadrupling is for the 50 year period. The tables above spans over 42 years, with a 330% growth in that time, which translates into 392% in 50 years.
Snake Oil Baron:
"Others are less legitimate - saying you are proud to be British is different from shouting "proud to be British" at someone and "go back to where you came from" which is obviously designed to intimidate and harass."
Case study: Brazil.
White population: Our future, 50%.
When one can not shout that he is proud to be part of his own land/Nation/country in his own land/Nation/country something is wrong. Especially when "minorities" in that country are encouraged to say they are proud to be "minorities" in the country though, they are not part of the Nation.
In Brazil, namely Rio de Janeiro, with a population of slightly more than 50% of people of European descent, one of the most selled t-shirts is a black one with bright grey coloured letters in which one can read: "Proud to be black" in Portuguese. You may not believe but many "whites", especially from the "leftist youth" weare that t-shirt proudly.
The opposite, a person wearing a t-shirt with the words "proud to be white" in Portuguese may face three months in prision for "racism".
Last summer (in the Southern hemisphere) greatest Brazilian musical hit was this (some of the footages are indeed real and those men are policemen, the best in the world fighting in Urban areas) funk styled (a new Brazilian music genre. Of which I am a fan.) music called "Rap das Armas". In English it means "Rap of the Weapons".
I know you probabily do not have a clue what is the daily life of Rio de Janeiro but I will only tell you something. It has a lot to due with segregation. Rich whites (High and Middle High Classes) may be some 30% of the population and live above the European average. The rest of the population live in typical third world conditions, worst than the conditions the Mexicans who cross the border to the U.S. expirience in Mexico. In the job market - and because Brazil punish racism with jail and heavy fines - there is a line in which it is requested "Good apearance". That means "white person" in Brazilian.
The violence is so great there that, in average, there are more people killed daily in Rio de Janeiro than in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. This, ever since the American invasion.
It is a war. Literally, a great part of the poor people there is controled by criminals who are, as a rule, better armed than the average Taliban. Also, there are governamental almost-killing-squads that are the only mean to prevent the "favela de invadir o asfalto" ("The biddon-ville to invade the asfalt) (That Portuguese-Brazilian expression is so real that I can not translate properly to you. It is strong.). The BOPE-Elite Squad movie is a must see and you shall see the link I provide in English to understand only a fraction of what I know/have heard what is in turn only a small fraction of what is really happening.
The Brazilian hit is song by two black "favelados" inhabitants of the "ghetto", and almost every people like the music despite it is highly offensive; it glorifies the "favelas", the frug dealing and consists on the discrition of the weapons most used (daily) by the people of the favelas.
I'll translate some verses:
"The neighbourhood of Dendê is hard to invade, we with the Germans (enemy in WWII/the police) will have some fun..."
"To climb up the neighbourhood even the BOPE fears..."
"Here we harass the army, the civilian and the police."
"We are all bad criminals (in the neighbourhood) and nobody works (true, it is the mafia that provides wotk to the majority of the peoples in that area) each with an AK47 and in the other hand a machine gun (and they use them daily)!"
"All the neigbours of ours are already saying they can't handle it, at the doors of the neighbourhoods we have caliber 50 (true, once more)."
"And if you get a "Pá!" ("paparapapapapapapapapapa" this is the noise of a machinegun) will you scream?"
"But if he is a German, he won't leave to see tomorrow,
I finish the bastard, I give him some shots with a FAZAN;
Because those Germans,
They are all bastards...
They come with an old broken pistol
Shot twice and run away.
And if it is not with a revolver,
I will beat him to death
And finalise the rap (fight)
ending with a granade."
Do you want Europe to become Brazil?
P.S.- Rio de Janeiro was once known in Europe as "The Wonderfull City", now it is what it is.
Fjordman,
"I find it difficult to support the BNP, df. There is too much with the party's history I don't like."
Wow...
Honestly, how can you like your country and stand so proudly for Norwegian vallues, have you forgot the Vikings?
There is too much in Norwegian's History I don't like eather and that's not why I will stop supporting the worst Norwegian if he is fightig the just war, the war to save that Nation.
Also, Fjordman, if your considerations are so centred in anti-jihadism and not in Europe, you better become a self-hating Norse because here, in the IX century the Vikings killed a great Jihadist, a Galician bishop. That would retard the Reconquista some 100 years.
Ridiculous hãn? And please, do not say to me to go hate Jews and gays again, that is ridiculous as well;
You know that muslims are not the problem, muslism are part of a greater problem and you better choose if you are with Europe or against muslims because muslims are only a small part of it.
I personaly don't care if the ones who will destroy Europe are muslims or Budists or Europeans. I would fight them with the same strenght. So please Fjordman, do not say that there is much about an unpleasent past you dislike...
we all commit errors in our past.
I think you know what I mean.
Also, very good post though. Incredible. That's why I am such a great fan of yours.
Keep up the good work!
(what about that anti Semitism piece on Atlas Shrugs?)
Well Conservative Swede, sapient words but you forgot something.
Such situation can not last any longer. It will lead to a point in which the Third Wolders will fight each other in their own States and we in Europe will fight the foreigners in many National Civil War for the Civilisation.
The results will be seen in the future.
What I fear is if the Third Worlders in the Third World can get able to attack the West. That wouldn't be pretty. Imagine Europe in a Civil War and China helping the enemy...
That is the great problem. The West is way too actractive in virtual all ways for the rest of the world to be neutral during a Civil War. That's the greater danger.
Is it possible to found an organization with the goal to lead and finance our liberation struggle and to negotiate with the governments? I would feel much more comfortable if we already had leaders. If the Zionists succeeded to create Israel as the Jewish homeland, can't we imitate them?
Conservative Swede:
You are not listening to what I said. The problem is not the Muslims or the Third Worlders. The problem is our "leaders" who have sold us on our own colonization. If we were reproducing at a healthy rate, they never would have gotten away with it. They never would have been able to argue that "we need Third World immigrants to support the aging baby boomers' pensions." (A lot of people believe this, even though we here know that Third World/Muslim immigrants are not going to assent to spending their lives supporting the old white Christians that they despise.) They never would have been able to sell their lies to us about "labor shortages" and the "richness" of "diversity." They never would have gotten away with half of what they've done to us. We need to show them we intend to survive, and to eventually punish those who have worked against our survival. Higher birth rates would do that. The one thing that scares the globalists to death is Western people reproducing. How do I know? In the US there is this fundamentalist Christian couple from Arkansas that has 17 kids, and who are expecting their 18th child right now. They have their own reality TV show on cable tv. You would not believe how much this couple is abused and despised by the "progressives." For the usual reasons: they are white and Christian. If they were black or Hispanic people reproducing at that rate, no one would say a peep. The global fascists/marxists are scared of us troublesome, individualistic Western people reproducing, so why not give them some nightmares? As for Japan, they have plans for it too. Did you not see the recent news that the Tony Blair clone who was elected PM of Australia is proposing an "Asia" union with completely open borders? Meaning of course the death of Japan, Australia, South Korea and any other Pacific nation that has a decent living standard and political system. Our enemies are neither communists nor fascists -- our enemies are BOTH.
Read this everyone, to understand fully what we face:
http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/open-borders-global-future
These nutters want to destroy every single half-way decent civilization on earth. These people are scary and they are gaining power all over the developed world. They are backed by huge corporations and massive resources. How do we fight them?
Queen,
OK, I understand how you are thinking. But it wouldn't work. Doesn't work that way. And I think you know it. You are not looking at the full picture.
If we were reproducing at a healthy rate, they never would have gotten away with it. They never would have been able to argue that "we need Third World immigrants to support the aging baby boomers' pensions."
The prime argument for flooding us with Third Worlders are that they are poor refugees, and that we do it out of Christian goodness (a sort of charity but expressed in liberal ideology). This argument is not at all related to the birth rate of the original people.
The argument for how having swarms of "refugees" living on welfare money somehow magically will pay our pensions, is of course used in addition. The "argument" is absurd.
Furthermore, even with a orderly immigration, of people of whom 100% would be working, to have it in a time of low birth rates will lead to population replacement. I.e. it's exactly the wrong time to do it if you want to keep your country and culture intact! The argument is completely upside-down. It's only when we ourselves have high birth rates that we could sustain large immigration.
But Westerners are so deeply indoctrinated with thinking economically instead of culturally, that they simply do not get this (and this includes the majority of the people writing here at GoV, with whom I regularly have this type of disagrement, in which they show this blindness).
They never would have been able to sell their lies to us about "labor shortages" and the "richness" of "diversity." They never would have gotten away with half of what they've done to us.
C'mon, Queen. Which planet are you living on? You speak as if truth, reason and justice had anything to do with it. I know you know better how our elites really are. They push through what they want to push through. And in the face of the organized state, you and I are merely alienated individuals. It's like the description by Diamed in his first entry of the comment thread. His comparison with Mao and Pol Pot is entirely apt.
The one thing that scares the globalists to death is Western people reproducing. How do I know? In the US there is this fundamentalist Christian couple from Arkansas that has 17 kids, and who are expecting their 18th child right now. They have their own reality TV show on cable tv. You would not believe how much this couple is abused and despised by the "progressives."
Well kudos to this family. I applaud them. However O'Cain McBama will push through the shamnesty during the next four years and then these 18 kids are up against 10 million Mexicans, and several more to come since the prime effect of a shamnesty is to attract a multiple more illegal aliens.
Scare the progressives (i.e. all of our political elite, ranging from Obama to Bush) and they will just work more eagerly towards our cultural destruction. The only remedy is to topple the whole lot in a proper counter-revolution.
Swede,
Of all you have said, it doesn't meant we shouldn't have more children. It's absurd to think that you can't do both.
> If you want to save England, start
> killing off the commies that are enslaving you.
*Exactly*.
"Don't die with tubes up your nose!"
Queen,
Sure, more children is very good. And we can do many things at the same time. But did you get my point? Making more babies does not at all address the problem at this point. It's like repairing the furniture while the boat is sinking after hitting an iceberg. I want, of course, a non-leaking boat and with repaired furniture. But the repaired furniture is pretty pointless if the boat is lying on the bottom of the ocean.
It's absurd to think that you can't do both.
I'm sorry, Queen, but that's really my line. I'm the only one who say that we can do both. And I'm not specifically comparing myself with you here, but with any commenter. But since it's you I have on the line, I ask you: are you with me on this? We need to quench the population explosion in Muslim and sub-Sahara countries. No more Western medicine. No more food from us. No more money. No nothing. It's not until more than half of their children die that the problem is solved.
In biology all growth takes the shape of an S-curve--yes everything is bound to hit the roof. If we let the Muslim and sub-Sahara reach 10 billions, while we have shrunk to insignificant numbers, it just means that billions more children will have to die. So it's better, and much less cruel, to let them reach the flattening top of the S-curve now.
For friendly and co-operative countries we should offer a Chinese style program, in order to reduce their suffering. Children won't have to die if the problem is dealt with in a civilized way.
Of course we need to get the Catholic Church out of Africa.
Making more babies does not at all address the problem at this point.
It will help us get our own "governments" in line. They will fear us if our populations are growing. On this I am certain.
We need to quench the population explosion in Muslim and sub-Sahara countries. No more Western medicine. No more food from us. No more money. No nothing. It's not until more than half of their children die that the problem is solved.
I would rather that aid is tied to birth control usage and fertility reduction.
For the subsaharans, at least. For the Muslims, nothing. That's what they'd give us.
Queen:
You are failing to see a very simple point: No mass immigration nulifies your argument totally.
Leave these people to their own devices in their own nations. If we allow them into Britain all that will happen is their birth rate will increase both here and back in their lands of origen. We cannot out breed mass-immigrants at home as well as their own lands. This is also a recipe for disaster on several fronts, over-population being the most important.
There is also the issue of how western judeo-christian values have been systematically destroyed and undermined in Britain. Divorce is sky-high, the abortion rate increasing and many couples choose to live together, many separate and of course they aren't included in the stats. Church attendances are in free-fall.
Britain is not the US. Multiculturalism is a nightmare for our people. A major problem is differing immigrant groups fighting each other for control of territory. In the areas affected, the indiginous people have been driven out -imagine that, "foreigners in your own land".
It is all down to a sustained and deliberate attack by marxists to destroy Britain and they are succeeding. But people are beginning to wake up to the multicultural EUSSR horror of UK 2008 and hopefully, we can get our country back. The first step is to stop mass immigration.
Queen,
It will help us get our own "governments" in line. They will fear us if our populations are growing. On this I am certain.
Well, it's a statement, that's for sure. A statement of life and vitality. Then it's a wholly different thing what influence it will have on our organized state elites. E.g. against Pol Pot it clearly wouldn't have helped much.
The biggest thing if people start breeding on a broad basis is that something different than the state elites have the decisive influence over their life choices (this is bigger than the breeding in itself!). The state elites does not want them to breed, and actually caused most of this situation with low birth rates. So we really need to break the state control before there would be any breeding on broad basis. But I always support and encourage people engaging in activities that could lead to more babies.
I would rather that aid is tied to birth control usage and fertility reduction.
As I stated, so do I. But as I also stated, it's not up to us how they want it.
For the subsaharans, at least. For the Muslims, nothing. That's what they'd give us.
Yes, this is more or less how I imagine it too. However, nothing to Mugabe and his kind. They decide really. As I already wrote "For friendly and co-operative countries we should offer a Chinese style program".
Defiant Lion,
You are failing to see a very simple point: No mass immigration nulifies your argument totally.
I think you failed to follow how the discussion between me and Queen developed.
Secondly, immigration stop does not nullify the birth rate issue, only reverse immigration does! And then we still need to deal with our low birth rates. It is a problem, but, as we agree, it's not one of our urgent problems now.
Leave these people to their own devices in their own nations.
When people from the lib/lab/con/bnp camp say this it normally means continued Western medicine for them; continued Western food, aid and money. When I listen to Nick Griffin it's clear that he thinks that if you just get rid of the Muslims and put up good fences around Britain, that we will live happily ever after. BNP has an entirely provincial perspective and fail to see how the problems outside of our countries significantly relate to us. Nick Griffin is all kumbaya about sharia and stoning for adultery if it happens in Muslim land.
The global perspective is essential here. If it's not resolved, any progress at the provincial level is going to be nullified.
What is needed is to actively stop Westerners (governments, NGOs, individuals) from sending medicine, food, money etc. to Muslim countries. All of it! Doing so must be considered an act of treason and be punished.
Britain is not the US. Multiculturalism is a nightmare for our people.
Multiculturalism is a nightmare for the Americans too (even if they invented it).
The first step is to stop mass immigration.
It's a rather small step in the bigger picture. But having it stopped signifies that the vicious circle has been broken and that the tide has turned. But it's really just a beginning of the beginning.
According to Diamed: "When conditions worsen, when the economy collapses, or crime reaches the levels of south africa, nothing will change then either. History has taught us that no matter how bad the tyrant, so long as the army backs him up, and the secret police keep the government and people in terror, so long as the people aren't armed and free speech is banned--there's really nothing we can do."
We are not really in that type of situation. Through the brainwashing of people and control of the media and institutions, the anti European ideology of the extreme left does prevent popular reaction to its policies. However, it is a soft, flexible dictatorship, not a violent regime supported by the army. Our media and institutions are dominated by the extreme left, but there is no complete control. Very few dissidents are jailed. We are not terrorized, only intimidated. We are still allowed to criticize the immigration policy on the internet. I think the flexibility of a dictatorship can make it last both longer or shorter. We don't know what will happen. Eventually, I think the journalists, teachers, civil servants and politicians will realize they are hurting themselves by supporting anti-white policies. Then, the brainwashing and censorship will be relaxed. I hope the tide will turn before the whites become a small minority.
CS:
"Secondly, immigration stop does not nullify the birth rate issue, only reverse immigration does!"
I didn't say it did I said stopping MASS IMMIGRATION was the FIRST step. You can be sure that sending immigrants to their lands of origien would subsequently follow.
"When people from the lib/lab/con/bnp camp say this it normally means continued Western medicine for them; continued Western food, aid and money. When I listen to Nick Griffin it's clear that he thinks that if you just get rid of the Muslims and put up good fences around Britain, that we will live happily ever after"
If you think the BNP as a nationalist party would continue to send aid to the third world then you know nothing about the BNP. Griffin's stance is one I agree with.Leave muslims to turn on each other in their own lands. Islam is their problem not ours.
" BNP has an entirely provincial perspective and fail to see how the problems outside of our countries significantly relate to us."
Incorrect. We say we will standup- for British interests wherever they are threatened. Quite right too.
"The global perspective is essential here"
No it isn't, a nationalist self-sufficient stance is. That's why we are a nationalist party. It is not our responisibility to solve the problems of the world.
"What is needed is to actively stop Westerners (governments, NGOs, individuals) from sending medicine, food, money etc. to Muslim countries. All of it! Doing so must be considered an act of treason and be punished."
On that we agree.
"It's a rather small step in the bigger picture."
It is the biggest most important step. You can't empty a bucket if you cntinue to fill it. All other steps follow this one.
DL,
Griffin's stance is one I agree with. ... Islam is their problem not ours.
There's that problematic provincialism in a nutshell. We will have reason to get back to this.
Otherwise we agree.
DL,
We say we will standup- for British interests wherever they are threatened.
Are these just words, or do they mean anything?
Does it mean that you now agree that you have the moral and legal right to the oil fields in Iran; the assets of British Petroleum that were confiscated, without compensation, by the regime of Ayatollah Khomeini after the revolution in 1979? That the Iranian mullocracy is not the rightful owner of these assets? That this is a wrong the needs to be righted?
DL,
If you think the BNP as a nationalist party would continue to send aid to the third world then you know nothing about the BNP.
The government aid is just a lesser part of the picture, and no, of course BNP wouldn't continue sending that. But thanks to the provincialism of the BNP it wouldn't do much to stop the population explosion in the Muslim world. All caused by Westerners, including British NGOs and individuals. With the provincialism of BNP, where the attitude is "what's happening in other countries is none of our problem", I do not see the addressing of this problem coming from their direction.
If Muslims, say 5% population of a country, have four or five children per wife, these children will produce as many children as what 95% of the population produces. This means, that the next generation after the first round of children will be 50% Muslim and 50%, say Danish. The percentage of Muslims in a country may appear to be small, but within no time the following generations of Muslims produced will become the majority. Mark Steyn had explained this in a video I had watched.
Now is time to take to the streets in great numbers - I mean hundreds of thousands, if not millions in London, and all about Britain. The people need to take back their country. There is no need for violence - the presence of demonstrators will be daunting enough for the authorities. Demands must be drawn up and a time limit given for compliance. The reason the British are allowing this to go on in their country is because individuals are being singled out and punished for not complying with political correctness and multiculturalism. The authorities will not know what to do with the masses.
Or else you can do it an easier way. God and one man is the majority, so you decide what to do.
When a country no longer treats its elderly with respect, care, and compassion, they have not only reached the slippery slope, but have begun to hit bottom.
Joanne,
If Muslims, say 5% population of a country, have four or five children per wife, these children will produce as many children as what 95% of the population produces.
This is way exaggerated. And Mark Steyn is known for exaggerating. Look at my calculations above. They are correct. However, after two generations (if they also get their spouses from abroad) this is true. And then they start from a 15-20% share of the population, and already that is a living hell.
So even if the statement above is not true, it just takes another two decades and it is. And many European cities today already have 15-25% Muslims so in those cities it's already true. It's not easy to be a school kid today.
Also take in consideration that Muslims concentrate in the cities, so yes this whole thing will blow up in our faces within two decades, probably earlier.
CS:
"Are these just words, or do they mean anything?"
Be assured that under the BNP, British interests will be defended if threatened.
"Does it mean that you now agree that you have the moral and legal right to the oil fields in Iran; the assets of British Petroleum that were confiscated, without compensation, by the regime of Ayatollah Khomeini after the revolution in 1979?"
Given that the US interfered - disastrously so - in Iran's affairs, I'd say this is a clear example of why we shouldn't interfere again. There are smarter solutions. We would also begin a comprehensive program of weaning our nation off oil so we could become self-sufficient for our energy needs.
"I do not see the addressing of this problem coming from their direction."
I don't care about how they deal with their problems in their own lands. If their populations continue to expand it will be their problem entirely because they won't be in our land.
I'm amazed at the all-or-nothing rigid thinking on display here. I never said anything about not stopping or not reversing Muslim immigration into the West. I merely stated that if we had higher birth rates, it might be easier to stop the invasion of not only Muslims, but Third Worlders in general, into the West. After all, a country like Britain or Netherlands is a very small country -- if natives were having more children, they wouldn't physically be able to stuff more "immigrants" in. Even the craziest of Western-people-hating Guardianista fanatics would have to admit to that.
Queen:
If anyone is demostrating rigid thinking on here it is you.
Think about this: If we engage in a breeding competion, what will happen to the population levels? How will they be fed? How will their energy needs be met?
And how on earth do you expect families in the high-tax UK to compete with fathers who sire 3-4 children to multiple mothers all subsidised by taxpayer UK?
It isn't just about out-breeding them, the issues go far, far deeper. The only answer is to stop mass immigration into our land and to kick out those people who have no right to be here.
Other solutions, including supplying energy and food for our people will follow from this.
Hey Queen,
I did not so much argue with you, as you triggered me to bring up something important. Read my comments from that perspective. These are interesting things--and important!
I understand your will to find something we can do that is constructive. And I support you in that attitude. But the hard facts must be realized too.
Defiant Lion,
I'll get back to you about your provincialism. There's quite a lot more to be said. But I'm sorry I do not have the time right now. But you are a nice sort of fellow, so I'm sure we will come to terms.
This reminds me that I should ask Henrik again who's got the moral right to the Golan Heights, and on what grounds. He's been avoiding that question.
CS said:This reminds me that I should ask Henrik again who's got the moral right to the Golan Heights, and on what grounds. He's been avoiding that question.
Can I answer? Israel won the territory in a defensive war, and according to international law, it belongs to Israel. If the Golan Heights belonged to any non-Jewish state, no one would ask the question.
Latte Island:
Your answer is absolutely correct. If the Israelis surrender the Golan it will be an act of suicidal insanity.
CS:
I'm sure we'll debate further, look forward to it!
If Israel surrenders the Golan heights it will indicate that the Israeli leadership is infected with the same wishful thinking that afflicts the West.
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.