Saturday, September 20, 2008

Taking a Lesson from Europe

As I have often said, Europe and the United States are on the same road to Sharia, but Europe is a few steps ahead of the USA. What happens is Europe will eventually happen here.

Europe is the canary in our coal mine. The big question is how we will respond to the cautionary example provided by the Europeans. Those who belong to what Conservative Swede calls the “pass the popcorn” school of Europhobia may indulge their schadenfreude when Europe descends into chaos, but they ignore at their peril the systemic conditions right here in the USA that are propelling us into a similar crisis.

In Europe — even in Sweden! — there are officially recognized mainstream political parties that oppose Islamization. The Lega Nord, Partij Voor De Vrijheid, Vlaams Belang, the BNP, the Front National, Sverigedemokraterna, the FPÖ, Dansk Folkeparti — most European countries provide a recognizable alternative for voters who support their countries’ traditional identity and values and oppose mass immigration.

But not in my country. In America we have no such alternative. Both major political parties support open borders and amnesty for illegal immigrants. Small parties that oppose mass immigration are at best marginal and will take decades to have any significant electoral success. Every election sees the Democrats and the Republicans put the more or less the same multicultural plank into their platforms, even as opinion polls show that voters overwhelmingly oppose our current immigration policies.

If I were in Denmark, I could vote Dansk Folkeparti to register my opposition to mass immigration, and a substantial number of members of my chosen party would take seats in Parliament and become cabinet ministers.

But in the USA I have no such option. I can vote for Tweedledum or Tweedledee for president, but I can’t vote for someone who will make any changes in the right direction and who has a even a slight chance of being elected.

There are exceptions, of course, at the local and Congressional level. I’m fortunate to be in the 5th District of Virginia, so I am represented in Congress by the Hon. Virgil Goode, who is a staunch opponent of open borders.

One of his anti-immigration colleagues in the House of Representatives is the Hon. Tom Tancredo of Colorado. Mr. Tancredo has not let the lessons of Europe pass unnoticed. In the wake of the recent codification of Sharia as an officially recognized part of British law, he has gone so far as to propose legislation to prevent the imposition of Sharia in this country.

According to Rep. Tancredo’s website:

Tancredo Proposes Anti-Sharia Measure in Wake of U.K. Certification of Islamic Courts

“Jihad Prevention Act” would deny U.S. visas to advocates of ‘Sharia’ law, expel Islamists already here

( WASHINGTON, DC ) — Amid disturbing revelations that the verdicts of Islamic Sharia courts are now legally binding in civil cases in the United Kingdom, U.S. Representative Tom Tancredo (R-Littleton) moved quickly today to introduce legislation designed to protect the United States from a similar fate.
- - - - - - - - -
According to recent news reports, a new network of Sharia courts in a half-dozen major cities in the U.K. have been empowered under British law to adjudicate a wide variety of legal cases ranging from divorces and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence.

“This is a case where truth is truly stranger than fiction,” said Tancredo. “Today the British people are learning a hard lesson about the consequences of massive, unrestricted immigration.”

Sharia law, favored by Muslim extremists around the world, often calls for brutal punishment — such as the stoning of women who are accused of adultery or have children out of wedlock, cutting off the hands of petty thieves and lashings for the casual consumption of alcohol. Under Sharia law, a woman is often required to provide numerous witnesses to prove rape allegations against an assailant — a near impossible task.

“When you have an immigration policy that allows for the importation of millions of radical Muslims, you are also importing their radical ideology — an ideology that is fundamentally hostile to the foundations of western democracy — such as gender equality, pluralism, and individual liberty,” said Tancredo. “The best way to safeguard America against the importation of the destructive effects of this poisonous ideology is to prevent its purveyors from coming here in the first place.”

Tancredo’s bill, dubbed the “Jihad Prevention Act,” would bar the entry of foreign nationals who advocate Sharia law. In addition, the legislation would make the advocacy of Sharia law by radical Muslims already in the United States a deportable offense.

Tancredo pointed to the results of a recent poll conducted by the Centre for Social Cohesion as evidence that the U.S. should act to prevent the situation in Great Britain from replicating itself here in the United States. The poll found that some 40 percent of Muslim students in the United Kingdom support the introduction of Sharia law there, and 33 percent support the imposition of an Islamic Sharia-based government worldwide.

“We need to send a clear message that the only law we recognize here in America is the U.S. Constitution and the laws passed by our democratically elected representatives,” concluded Tancredo. “If you aren’t comfortable with that concept, you aren’t welcome in the United States.”

According to some of the CAIR-sponsored legislation now being proposed in Congress, Tom Tancredo’s words would constitute a defamation of Islam and be a form of hate speech.

We’ll just have to hope that he has Congressional immunity.


Hat tip: no2liberals.

26 comments:

Afonso Henriques said...

"most European countries provide a recognizable alternative for voters who support their countries’ traditional identity and values and oppose mass immigration.
But not in my country. In America we have no such alternative. Both major political parties support open borders and amnesty for illegal immigrants."

True, that's why to infiltrate in the GOP (can I say it?) should be, to "true" Americans, a patriotic obligation.

However, I am confident in a better future with people like Sarah Palin. And Baron, honestly, I would like to see more Republicans like you instead of Bush, McCains and the Neocons there... I like Giuliani however and am sympathetic to Rom Paul who was on Russi Today few hours ago... I've also seen there John Laughland from the Brussels Journal.

Carolina Conservative said...

We need more politicians that will stand up and fight for their own country. Instead many of them want a global new world order. They want to tear down borders. I'm an American. I love the United States. I'm not a global citizen. I do we, as well as our European brothers and sisters, would rise up against those that would do us harm. Many of those are those elected to serve us. We need to vote them out of office.

USorThem said...

I'll just paste a comment left at JihadWatch on this same topic here and add a few notes:


Where does Rep. Sue Myrick's Congressional Anti-Jihad Caucus stand on this issue? I would bet a substantial sum that if any of us who live in districts of caucus representatives, calls the respective district offices, the majority of members will give answer a) of these 3 options:

a) we're looking at it and have no position

b) we don't support

c) we do support

Call your Representative and press him/her on this issue. There are supposedly 50+ members of the Anti-Jihad Congressional caucus. I called my Congressman and inquired if he was a member, and if so, could he provide a list of other member representatives. His office affirmed he was a member,(Joe Wilson, R.- SC), but refused to provide a full list of caucus membership, without explanation. These Anti-Jihad members, whoever they may be, ought to be taking the lead on this issue. If they are members, and don't support, or are wishy washy on it, they are not so much for anti-jihad are they?

Does anyone know of other members? I now know of only 3 1. Sue Myrick (NC), Peter King (NY), and Joe Wilson (SC).

Anyone motivated enough to contact their representative to encourage them to support this bill, ought to also inquire of membership in the caucus, and if they are not a member, suggest they become one. END

Baron- Is V. Goode a member of Anti-Jihad Caucus? Do you know of any members by name and district?

Bela said...

baron:

While factually you are correct, that is, there is no opposition party to this madness in the US, there is a very substantial difference in our favor.

As you can see European opposition parties are nice thing to have like a jewel but they are powerless, small in numbers and 40.000 enraged violent Communist will silence or kill those who stand in the way.

We don’t have similar parties but Americans are for the most part rational people and not ideologues like the Europeans and nearly not as brainwashed than they are.
If something crosses the line and becoming intolerable, Americans - regardless of party affiliation - tend to revolt: remember the protest against immigration reform when Bush finally backed off.

The States are too big , spread out, fractured, decentralized to be controlled by a leftist cabal.
Unlike in the EU where only YOU and the Brussels Journals are the ONLY opposition, in the US there are many, many outstanding blogs and news aggravation challenging the MSM monopoly: nothing remains secret longer than 5 minutes, after that the nasty news spread like wild fires.
In the EU everything is controlled by the State but not here.
While San Francisco can turn into a Commie cesspool, Texas definitely will resist; no, Americans are not sheeply people.

As per immigration this is from a Jewish website:

"http://jewsvote.org/barack-obama

According to a recent opinion survey of American Jews by the American Jewish Committee, Obama’s positions on a range of issues are closely aligned with those of most Jews. For example:

67% believe the United States should allow illegal immigrants to remain and become U.S. citizens if they meet certain requirements over a period of time. Obama has consistently stated that comprehensive immigration reform is the only solution; McCain, after championing these reforms, has backtracked to emphasize punitive measures embraced by anti-immigrant activists in the Republican Party."

If this guy, Obama wins, and screws up things, there will be huge repercussion against the Jews.

Joanne said...

Some people just don't get it. The laws of the land are the laws of the land; if you don't like the laws, then bugger off and go elsewhere. It is pathetic that people have to even entertain the thought of Sharia Law in their countries. Kick all followers of Islam out; it is only a matter of time when all hell breaks loose that this option will be the only one remaining on the table. Just like a preemptive strike on Iran is inevitable, so is this one.

Baron Bodissey said...

UsOrThem --

I haven't talked to Virgil in a while, but I assume his stance hasn't changed. He's the one who got himself in hot water with CAIR and ISNA for objecting to Keith Ellison taking his oath of office on the Koran. That's how politically incorrect he is.

Baron Bodissey said...

Bela --

Unlike in the EU where only YOU and the Brussels Journals are the ONLY opposition

Not true. There are many opposition blogs, news sites, and forums in Europe. I'll name just a few: Snaphanen, Jussi Halla-aho, Uriasposten, SIOE, FOMI, Het Vrije Folk, GeenStijl, F. Desouche, Lisistrata, La Yijad en Eurabia, Islam in Europe, Politically Incorrect, Europe News, Tundra Tabloids, and rights.no. Not to mention the British ones. There are plenty of others, many of them writing under their real names.

Fjordman said...

Carolina Conservative: I'm starting to fear that "voting them out of office" won't be a viable option any longer. Maybe in the USA. Maybe. But not in Western Europe, where much of the power has been transferred away from elections to the EU, anyway.

Anonymous said...

It's nice to know that there are some intelligent politicians out there. All sharia law should be unconditionally banned. To even call it law is inaccurate and misleading: it's like saying a cat and a fish are alike because they are both carbon based life forms.

As for the opposition parties over in Europe, it seems to me that there are quite a few, but either they do not have large followings or, if they do, we do not seem to hear about them very much. Which does make sense in a way, considering how liberal the media is.

Anonymous said...

Forgot to say this before: Afonso, don't be so complimentary to Ron Paul--he's quite an isolationist and would not do anything against Islam.

I have observed, in general, that people who call themselves neocons often have very, very different views from mine, despite the fact that neocons are right-wing.

Anonymous Infidel said...

We in America are, in some ways just as bad off as Europe.

The Democrats are so beholden to countless lobbies, that they won't do anything. (The greens, the race hustlers, the Hispanic supremacists CAIR, and the like)

The Republicans, by and large are just too cowardly to do oppose the Marxists. (I won't mince words, the Moveon.org crowd and their ilk are socialists) If they oppose amnesty for illegal aliens, they'll be denounced as "racists" Not to mention incurring the wrath of big business. Same with Islam. I guess they kind of deserve it after decades of smearing by Democrats and Hollywood as "racist" or "closeted Klansmen", and being too much of cowards to fight back against these smears.

Anonymous said...

And where do you think this hardcore leftis and theire followers run to when Europa/Scandinavian countrys fall? Of course to you americans.

islam o' phobe said...

While the imposition of Eurarbia is well underway most people in Europe are still unaware of it and have not experienced any personal suffering because of it.

George Washington once said "People must feel an evil, before they will see it."

Afonso Henriques said...

Bela, always bashing somebody...

"Americans are for the most part rational people and not ideologues like the Europeans"

To have a clear ideology is not a weakness, its a strneght. Also, you have only to see an American talk about Capitalism to see excessive ideology on the Uncles Sams... Ieltsin's Russia... that was pure evil Capitalism...

Continuing... Texas? I thought Texas was now known as Northern Mexico (kidding! but not much...); you know as well as I do the current demographic trends and you know that that's why the left gains strenght so...

But I just commented to say I'm shocked with that 75% Jewish aproval of abortion. How many Jewish abortions are there (dead. kidding! again...)?

So, the Jews are for the abortion of other ethnicities... why do I feel Europeans are targeted?

I was just shocked.

Afonso Henriques said...

"The laws of the land are the laws of the land"

By the way, Joanne seems to be against democrcy just like me!

In democracy, the people do and alter the laws whenever they want. Especially, if they are somewhat foreigners... think about it...

Afonso Henriques said...

Natalie,

well... I have to say I don't know much about Ron Paul. What I know is that he was a kind os surprise in the Republican "internal elections(?)" (sorry, I forgot how you call it :) ).

I mentioned him because he was recently in Sochi (small Russian town near Georgia) in a big Russian convention on business and economics. You may know that the Russian stock exchange just crashed about some 40%. My explanation?
...
... The Americans did it!

As I see it, Americans took their money away from Russia after this Georgian Crisis and, to see an American (that I could recognise their) was quiet a surprise for me. I took it as a little American bridge in relation to Russia.

Also, their politics.
I tend to see this from an European angle. Well, I always supported the war in Afghanistan. What the hell! After what happen, I'd even support a war against the French!!! You had to bully someone, to show you're the boss of the world and leader of this Civilisation...

However, I think you know my views on Iraq and what I do not want is another Iraq, or should I say Iran...
Also, when you see the trend of the war on terror, you start to wonder if it's not just an encircle of Russia. Russia, I didn't like how America acted over Georgia.
I don't want America to have businesses in the Caucasus or in Ukraine, I don't want the American defense system in Eastern Europe...

That's why I think that a little bit more of isolationism would be better... Also, I think that before looking for muslims you should look South, to Latin America and to your own borders, stop the Indigenisation of the American Southwest! You know, I can see monsters rising in Latin America... as an "isolationist", I think he would look at it better.

Concerning the neo-cons... I am glad to know that you differ from them (though I already did, this was just a kind of a confirmation) but, let's look at the word:

nye-conservatives... At my eyes, they are lefties who started saying they are right wing because they did not liked 9/11. They still have the Leftist Brain. Let's say that they only have a bigger patriotism node.

Afonso Henriques said...

Hilde,

did you know that argument was used by people to brand me as an anti-semite-supporter-of-the-state-of-Israel?

You are right though. At current trends, the conservatives will die or run to Russia :)

Morgan said...

"One of his anti-immigration colleagues in the House of Representatives is the Hon. Tom Tancredo of Colorado."

Not to be nitpicking, Baron, but Congressman Tancredo is not anti-immigration, but anti-illegal immigration. He is also opposed to open borders, which I assume is the same as opposing mass immigration. Advocates of open borders and illegal immigration always make the same claim about Mr. Tancredo being anti-immigration, and it's a falsehood.

Baron Bodissey said...

Morgan --

You are quite right. I was imprecise. I should have said "anti-mass-immigration", even though it's a clumsy phrase.

Which is, in fact, the same as my own position.

Bela said...

afonso h:

You should know that I am RACIST! RACIST! therefore I am entitled to bash anybody I wish to, provided I do it a polite way according to posting rules. You are entitled to heavy America bashing though to get even.

FYI: Ron Paul is Libertarian, to wit neither conservative nor Republican. Check it out for your enlightenment: key word: "Libertarian".

Also please keep on entertaining us how great Portugal was 1000 BC.

Regards

Anonymous said...

Muslims Against Sharia praise Congressman Tancredo's initiative. We advocated similar measures in the past and fully support "Gihad Prevention Act"

"Any person from a country where a substantial part of the population is pro-Sharia should not be allowed in the West, not only as an immigrant, but even as a visitor with a few exceptions, i.e., political asylum or as a diplomat etc. ... Every legal immigrant should be allowed to stay only if he/she did not display desire to establish a Sharia state in a host country. Any naturalized citizen who displays a desire to establish a Sharia state in a host country should have his/her citizenship revoked and promptly deported. I think the latter two groups is where the real danger lies." Linda Ahmed, FrontPage Magazine, July 24, 2008

"Anyone who proclaims Islamic extremist views should be tried for sedition, since we are at war with radical Islam, or at the very least, promptly deported." Khalim Massoud, FrontPage Magazine, September 9, 2008

http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2008/09/tancredo-proposes-anti-sharia-measure.html

Anonymous said...

I'm at a bit of a loss for where to look for historical precedents for our current predicament.

There are of course precedents for the will of the public being defied by those in power. And the corrections for those situations are, traditionally speaking, not pretty.

But the part that puzzles me is that it has normally been a struggle for control of a given country or region where the argument runs "it's mine not yours".

I don't know of any historical precedents for the ruling class of a country giving that country away to foreigners, at least not to militarily inferior foreigners.

I hesitate to look to the anti-colonial movements of the third world for examples of how our situation might be dealt with, but I'm not sure if anyone else has been in anything else even faintly like our current circumstances.

The worst of it is that those movements were, as near as I can tell, dominated by collectivists, racists and various other proponents of irrational ideologies.

This is apt to prove a watershed moment in history -- for good or ill.

BTW, BB is quite right about the situation here in the US.

It really is a choice between tweedle-dumb and tweedle-dumber.

There is even less organized defense of the west here than in Europe.

Afonso Henriques said...

Bela,

What does FYI means? For your information? It probabily is, at least I will assume so.

Anyway, I found this in which you can read:

"Ron Paul was a Republican Party primary candidate in the 2008 United States presidential election."

That makes him a Republican in my eyes, maybe because only last year I finally learned what was a Republican and a Democrat. You know, maybe because here a Republican is some one who favours a Republic instead of a monarchy and that word "Republicano" (Republican) is usually used to describe the Radical Republicans who murdered The Most Faithfull Majesty, the King D. Carlos I in the centre of Lisbon in 1908 and implemeted the insane First Republic whose goal was to stone Catholic priests to death, opened in that way the path to the current atheism/agnosticism and in my view, to the whole madness and insanity that is not directly to be blamed for the events of 1789 and the rising of Napoleon in France. They were also (Free)Masons. They also implemented this meaningless flag which does not respect Tradition and made the people to forget their real flag which can be traced to the beginning of the Reconquista against the moors. They also ended the great tradition of the Bigode à D. Carlos.

(mustache TMFM the King D. Carlos style)

And a "Democrata" (Democrat) is just a supporter of Democracy. Especially an "anti-fascist", leftist and pro-European Union person.

"Also please keep on entertaining us how great Portugal was 1000 BC."

And Russia? You cant also forget about Russia... I've already talked about the greatness of Portugal, especially, the "bigode à D. Carlos", which undoubtedly prooves that who exhibits one is a good person and a trustable and honured man. The next time, I'll tell you how much I hate the current Portuguese flag... (which I strangly also are attached too)

Take care.

Bela said...

afonso h:

"And Bela, why do you know the names? Because you have free pess."

Not exactly. The sources of money, the names of the financiers cannot be hidden for long: It's hard to believe that there are no investigative journalist/individuals amongst 500 million Europeans - if there is a will!
Even during the Stalinist era there were many courageous individuals who smuggled out banned publications; - one can upload it to the net for all to see.

Protesting on the street will yield no tangible result but publishing the names of the chief conspirators including their pictures on a American Web server is a good idea.
Remember George Galloway's Oil for Food scandal...now he's gone.

In the US the media is firmly in the hands and control of the hard left paid for by rich Jewish individuals like Barbara Streisand - for the most part - so the Blogosphere is the only tool left to unmask the bastards: an American blogger found out the fake, Photoshopped images of Reuters and in less than 5 minutes the whole world laughed at Reuters...

I did not see any coherent, efficient, well organized resistant movement in the EU against the current course of events.
Am I wrong?

P.S. FYI= Yes, for your information.

Afonso Henriques said...

Bela, I do not have much expirience, nor can I talk about Europe as a whole. I think I can however speak about Portugal and Spain.

You may understand this better than most Americans due to your recent European "blood memory"(?). Here it goes:

America is to concerned about economics and money, Europe is more about power and politics. So, we don't give a f*** about the financers.

Historically in Europe, we have known who have had money: The Nobels (Nobility), the hated Burguoise and, of course, the way hated Jews.

In this little corner, I think you need a deep contextualisation but I will only say that both Portugal and Spain had had terrible XIX centuries. Napoleon invaded both of us and we (Portugal) had to fight in France and Spain and then Spain and then ourselves in Civil Wars. Spain also had the XIX century filled with Civil Wars. So, by the XIX century the financers were known by all:
- Jews
- Foreign Burguoise (mainly French)
- Foreign States (mainly French)
- Secret Societies (various, the most well known being that of the Free Masons. Also comprised mainly by the burguoise.)

All this resulted in the loss of our greatest source of wealth and power: The colonies, while the French efectively blocked our businesses with the rest of Europe.

So, in the end of the XIX century and beginning of the XX, we were very poor and with lots of instability with coup's de etat and civil wars everywhere in the turn of the corner. And then came fascism to Portugal (Salazarism) with the establishment of the army as the main institution. In Spain, they got the Civil War.

Then there was the WWII and all. Then we get ridd of fascism but we were poor. That's when we turned to the left and our leftist elites liked everything French. For them, all that was good had to be the type of French Socialism. They had the support of the people. In the 70s we had to opt between Soviet Socialism or French Socialism. (Those leftist elites had much to do with Secret Societies like the free masons) But we did not decided anything, Americans, Britts and French instaured us what I called French Socialism in the second half of the 70s.
In the end, we got into the E.U. in 1986 which meant that we were E.U. oriented and "de facto governed" since the late 70s, you know the rest of the story.

So I don't think there are "financers" but there are "ideologues" who are much, much more dangerous. And they are in our media, schools, parliament etc... The problem is the left, not the ones who have money. I would like to hear your conclusions from this.

PS - No, you're not wrong because while that is nothing in America, in Europe it will cost your future and you know a priori that you will not gather many supporters and that the EU/leftist parties will end you whenever they want.

DEMOCRACY IS AN ILUSION!

Bela said...

afonso h:

"So, we don't give a f*** about the financers.

It's untrue: Europeans are as much concerned about money matters as Americans, only they speak less about it openly. You should know that every developed society uses money to run a country: your newspapers most likely are full of articles on the cost of whatever in the making or how much will be the gas next year or the heating bill..

Check out the earnings and fringe benefits of the EU parliamentarians in Brussels.

Hitler had money men too:

Source G
Hitler’s financiers

Many industrials bankrolled the Nazis, including allegedly:

· Hjalmar Schacht, Head of the Reichsbank, organised fund-raising parties for Hitler.

· Fritz von Thyssen, the German steel businessman

· Alfred Krupp, the owner of Krupp steel firm

· Emil Kirdorf, the coal businessman

· IG Faben, the German chemicals firm, gave half the funds for the 1933 elections

· The German car firm Opel (a subsidiary of General Motors)

· Schroeder Bank – on Jan. 3, 1933, Reinhard Schroeder met Hitler and asked him to form a government.

"So I don't think there are "financers" but there are "ideologues"

Ideologues need money to organize protest, to manufacture flags and propaganda materials, pay the salaries of full time organizers, travel-hotel expenses, advertisements running their own newspapers etc.

Lenin and the Money flow:

" It was not until the Bolsheviks had received from us a steady flow of funds through various channels and under varying labels that they were in a position to be able to build up their main organ Pravda, to conduct energetic propaganda and appreciably to extend the originally narrow base of their party.

Von Kühlmann, minister of foreign affairs, to the kaiser, December 3, 1917"