Monday, December 17, 2007

A Blueprint for the Suppression of Dissent in Europe

The EUSSRThe disappearance of liberty in Europe will not be accompanied by the loud knock of a jackbooted thug at the front door.

Basic freedoms are already being eroded imperceptibly by the European Union. The process has been going on for many years, drip by silent drip. In order to create Eurabia, the will of the people is muffled, suppressed, and discarded by the elites of the EU.

We have reported several times on the Framework Decision, a document generated by the EU bureaucracy which outlines the steps to be taken to suppress “xenophobia and racism”. Among the punishments sought against offenders would be imprisonment, fines, and “temporary or permanent disqualification from the practice of commercial activities, a judicial winding-up order, exclusion from entitlement to public aid”.

In other words — given the extent to which the average European citizen depends on the resources of the State — the offender against the Multicultural Order would become a non-person, without the ability to make a living or to provide food and shelter for his family.

Calling this monstrosity “the EUSSR” is not an overstatement.

The latest bureaucratic initiative on this issue emerged from Strasbourg a few days ago. Entitled the “European Parliament resolution of 13 December 2007 on combating the rise of extremism in Europe”, it lays out a series of steps designed to enforce acceptable Multicultural groupthink across all the “provinces” of the EU.

The full text is worth reading, so I’ve included the entire document at the bottom of this post. I’ll just touch on the highlights here.

The European Parliament has taken on the task of combating “racism, intolerance, incitement to religious hatred, exclusion, [and] xenophobia”. It asserts that “these extremist ideologies are incompatible with the principles of liberty [and] democracy”. It declares that its mission includes “combating the spread of xenophobic attitudes and extremist political movements”.

It states that “neo-Nazi, paramilitary and other extremisms are directing their violent attacks against a wide variety of vulnerable population groups, including migrants, the Roma, homosexuals, anti-racist activists”.

The EU Parliament actually mentions Islamic fundamentalism, giving a passing nod to the real danger now facing Europe. But we know from experience that its targets will inevitably be the patriots and supporters of traditional European culture. To the EU, controlling Islamic fundamentalism means restraining European natives to keep them from “provoking” Islam.

Most ominously, the document proposes “withdrawing public funding from political parties that do not condemn violence and terrorism and do not respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, democracy and the rule of law”. Since most European parties cannot legally function without state funding, this effectively allows an unaccountable supranational entity to dictate which political parties are allowed to exist within what used to be the sovereign nations of Europe.

The document calls on the European Commission and the European Council to effect “appropriate political and legal responses, especially at the preventive stage with reference to young people’s education and public information”. In other words, indoctrination and thought control in the public schools are to be the order of the day.

It wants “the EU institutions to give a clear mandate to the Fundamental Rights Agency to investigate the structures of extremist groups in order to assess whether some of them coordinate their work within their groups across the European Union or at regional level”.


EU StalinThere is no doubt that CVF-Europa and similar networks of anti-jihad activists would fall under the shadow of this rubric.

Ladies and gentlemen of Europe, this is a shot across our bows.

There may soon come a time when all the European readers of Gates of Vienna will be proscribed. Once all the countries of the EU ratify the Lisbon Treaty — and only a few remain — your leaders will have effectively given you over to the velvet jackboot of the bureaucrats in Brussels and Strasbourg.
- - - - - - - - -
This blog — run as it is by Americans and hosted outside of Europe, and thus beyond the reach of the long arm of the fascists of the European Union — may well become “Internet Free Europe”. Readers and former bloggers behind the new Iron Curtain will have to send encrypted emails for me to post so that the truth of what happens in Europe can be told.

The real news in Europe will no longer be available except as samizdat.

It’s come to this.

And the United States may not be far behind. Starting in 2009, under Empress President Hillary, with the support of an increasingly anti-libertarian Congress, the same kind of controls may eventually be applied to us.

But not yet. We still have a little time left.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

European Parliament resolution of 13 December 2007 on combating the rise of extremism in Europe
(emphasis added by Gates of Vienna)

The European Parliament,

  • having regard to its previous resolutions on racism, xenophobia and extremism, particularly that of 20 February 1997 on racism, xenophobia and the extreme right(1) , that of 15 June 2006 on the increase in racist and homophobic violence in Europe(2) and its position of 29 November 2007 on the proposal for a Council Framework Decision on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law(3),
  • having regard to its resolution of 27 January 2005 on the Holocaust, anti-Semitism and racism(4),
  • having regard to Articles 6, 7 and 29 of the EU Treaty and Article 13 of the EC Treaty, which commit the EU and its Member States to upholding human rights and fundamental freedoms and which provide it with the means to fight racism, xenophobia and discrimination, to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter of Fundamental Rights) and to the Council Regulation (EC) No 168/2007 of 15 February 2007 establishing the European Union Fundamental Rights Agency(5) (the Fundamental Rights Agency),
  • having regard to the international human rights instruments which prohibit discrimination based on racial and ethnic origin, notably the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), both signed by all the Member States and a large number of other States,
  • having regard to European Union activities to fight racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism and homophobia, in particular the two anti-discrimination directives (Directive 2000/43/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment of persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin(6) and Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation(7) ), as well as to the above-mentioned Framework Decision on combating racism and xenophobia,
  • having regard to Resolution 1344 of 29 September 2003 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on the threat posed to democracy by extremist parties and movements in Europe,
  • having regard to the Report on Racism and Xenophobia in the Member States of the EU published in 2007 by the Fundamental Rights Agency,
  • having regard to the report by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) entitled ‘Challenges and Responses to Hate-Motivated Incidents in the OSCE Region’ of October 2006,
  • having regard to Rule 103(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A. seriously concerned at the resurgence in Europe of extremist movements and paramilitary groups and parties, some of which even have governmental responsibilities, which base their ideology, political discourse, practices and conduct on discrimination, including racism, intolerance, incitement to religious hatred, exclusion, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, anti-Gypsyism, homophobia, misogyny and ultra-nationalism, and whereas several European countries have recently experienced hatred, violent events and killings,
B. seriously alarmed at the Islamic fundamentalist recruitment and violent propaganda campaign with terrorist attacks within the European Union, based on the hatred of European values and anti-semitism,
C. whereas these extremist ideologies are incompatible with the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the rule of law as set out in Article 6 of the EU Treaty, which reflect the values of diversity and equality on which the European Union is based,
D. whereas no Member State is immune from the intrinsic threats that extremism poses to democracy and, therefore combating the spread of xenophobic attitudes and extremist political movements is a European challenge that requires a joint and coordinated approach,
E. whereas some political parties and movements, including those currently in power in a number of countries or represented at local, national or European level, have deliberately placed intolerance and/or violence based on race, ethnic origin, nationality, religion and sexual orientation at the heart of their agenda,
F. whereas neo-Nazi, paramilitary and other extremisms are directing their violent attacks against a wide variety of vulnerable population groups, including migrants, the Roma, homosexuals, anti-racist activists and the homeless,
G. whereas the existence of public and easily accessible websites which incite to hatred raises serious concerns as to how to counteract the problem without violating freedom of expression,

1. Strongly condemns all racist and hate attacks, and calls on all authorities to do everything in their power to punish those responsible; expresses its solidarity with all victims of such attacks and their families;
2. Points out that fighting extremism must not have any negative effects on the permanent obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles, including freedom of expression and association, as enshrined in Article 6 of the EU Treaty;
3. Deplores the fact that some mainstream parties have seen fit to give credibility and acceptance to extremist parties by entering into coalition agreements, thereby sacrificing their moral integrity for the sake of short-term political gain and expediency;
4. Notes that the increasing number of extremist organisations, which often contain neo-fascist elements, can exacerbate fears in society that can lead to manifestations of racism in a broad range of areas, including employment, housing, education, health, policing, access to goods and services and the media;
5. Urges the Commission and Council to lead the search for appropriate political and legal responses, especially at the preventive stage with reference to young people’s education and public information, teaching against totalitarianism and disseminating the principles of human rights and fundamental freedoms in order to keep alive the memory of European history; calls upon the Member States to develop policies of education for democratic citizenship based on citizens’ rights and responsibilities;
6. Urges the Commission to monitor the full application of the existing legislation designed to prohibit incitement to political and religious violence, racism and xenophobia; calls on Member States to monitor the strict implementation and constant improvement of anti-racist laws, information and awareness-raising campaigns in the media and educational establishments;
7. Urges all democratic political forces, regardless of ideology, to avoid any support for extremist parties of a racist or xenophobic character, whether explicit or implicit, and hence also any alliance whatsoever with their elected representatives;
8. Warns, looking ahead to the 2009 European elections, of the possibility that extremist parties may secure representation in the European Parliament and calls on the political groups to take the appropriate measures in order to ensure that a democratic institution is not used as a platform for financing and echoing anti-democratic messages;
9. Calls on the EU institutions to give a clear mandate to the Fundamental Rights Agency to investigate the structures of extremist groups in order to assess whether some of them coordinate their work within their groups across the European Union or at regional level;
10. Reiterates its belief that public personalities should refrain from statements that encourage or incite to hatred or stigmatisation of groups of people on the basis of their race, ethnic origin, religion, disability, sexual orientation or nationality; believes that if public personalities incite to hatred, the fact that they have a high public profile should be considered an aggravating circumstance; condemns, in particular, the worrying prevalence of anti-semitism;
11. Calls on the media to inform the public about the dangers of hate speech and to help promote the principles and values of democracy, equality and tolerance;
12. Requests all Member States to at least provide for the possibility — after a court ruling — of withdrawing public funding from political parties that do not condemn violence and terrorism and do not respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, democracy and the rule of law as set out in the ECHR and the Charter of Fundamental Rights; and calls on those that already have this possibility to do so without delay; also calls on the Commission to ensure that no EU funding is available to media which are used as a platform to widely promote racist, xenophobic and homophobic ideas;
13. Calls on the Commission to support NGOs and civil society organisations devoted to promoting democratic values, human dignity, solidarity, social inclusion, inter-cultural dialogue and social awareness of the dangers of radicalisation and violent extremism, and which are devoted to fighting all forms of discrimination;
14. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments of the Member States and the Council of Europe.

1. OJ C 85, 17.3.1997, p. 150.
2. OJ C 300 E, 9.12.2006, p. 491.
3. Texts adopted, P6_TA(2007)0552.
4. OJ C 253 E, 13.10.2005, p. 37.
5. OJ L 53, 22.2.2007, p. 1.
6. OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22.
7. OJ L 303, 2.12.2000, p. 16.

Hat tip: Henrik.


Cobra said...

Canada and the US are not far from this stage.
Just look at what happens to Mark Steyn for his his last book-America Alone.
That's why we must fight first the internal enemy-the neo-bolshevism that infected the Western societies and created the premises for the islamo-fascist infiltration.

X said...

This is a shot across several bows, not just the free-thinkers on the net - though they're a big target too.

They specifically mentioned the Roma. This is no coincidence coming so soon (in EU terms) after Italy started mass-evicting roma "migrant workers" from around its major cities in order to prevent rioting by its own citizens. Whilst given an implicit endorsement by the EU commission, this activity runs contrary to one of the five pillars of the EU* legal, the idea that all EU citizens should be able to roam across the union at will. A grand idea in theory but it provides a mechanism for itinerants and illegal immigrants to break through the fairly strict non-EU immigration regs that most EU member states still have on the books.

This is all part of the political reality that certain US-based (and, indeed, many europe-based) blogs simply don't comprehend. The EU is not a distant entity, a remote thing that doesn't affect anyone's life. Afterr the Lisbon constitutional convention (which is pretty much what that "treaty" signing was) it is the supreme government of most of Europe, a national entity with all the powers associated with a nation state, and it is going to be exercising those powers in the very near future. As I said the other day, with the signing of Lisbon I became a petty criminal simply by posting here.

It may be incompetent, hopelessly corrupt and moribund but, that didn't stop the soviet union from enslaving its people for 70 years, so there's no reason to assume it won't stop the European union either.

*Yes, five pillars. Sound familiar?

spackle said...

"In other words — given the extent to which the average European citizen depends on the resources of the State — the offender against the Multicultural Order would become a non-person, without the ability to make a living or to provide food and shelter for his family."

Call me crazy but wouldnt this give certain people just cause to seek US citizenship as a political refugee? Third worlders get it for much less. I personally hope someone seeks and receives such a status. That would be a huge embarrassment to the EU elites.

X said...

The state department would put pressure on whomever deals with such things to deny anything like that - for some reason State has a vested interest in the EU project being mtaintained, a hangover from the days when they conceived of the project as abulwark against soviet expansion. On top of which it's likely the media would simply ignore it.

It'd be a coup if it happened, though.

Darrin Hodges said...


F451-2.0 said...

Aaah bugger.How long did it take?

Back to crystal sets, shortwave radios and one time pads.

Time to brush up on my morse code.

It was uh, three long three short three long, wasn't it?

F451-2.0 said...

Oh yeah, and tell the operator to get William Stephenson on the telephone. No, not him, the other one, Sir William, the true intrepid.

Papa Whiskey said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Charlemagne said...


Feel free to ban me if you like but I've hinted around this before and now I'm going to come out and say it, the Muslims in Europe MUST be provoked into attacking Europe even if that means *removing with prejudice* some of the more radical Imams to get things started. I believe this is so because if the EU is successful in both continuing or even increasing Muslim immigration and shutting down any and all opposition then the EU will have sealed Europe's Islamic fate. There will be no turning back. Islam must be forced to show its hand.
I'm surely not commenting with full knowledge of the situation on the ground in Europe but I just don't see more than an embryonic opposition movement that may yet be killed in the womb. Some of the wording in the referenced EU document bears this out.
We can write all we want but if some time soon it isn't followed up by action all could be lost.
If I'm being unnecessarily fatalistic please someone, anyone, provide evidence to the contrary.

Papa Whiskey said...

Let's see, now: "anti-racist activists" attack a small, peaceful Counterjihad demonstration in Copenhagen with iron bars and edged weapons, brag on it soon afterward, and then get designated as a "vulnerable population group"?

It is certainly coming thick and fast these days. The most malign aspect of this is that it will embolden these SA-style goons even further.

Bilgeman said...


It's quite simple, really.

For the EU to survive, patriotism,(as we know it), must be criminalized.

And the first step to criminalizing patriotism is to recast it as chauvinism and xenophobia.

Eventually, the sheople must be given the stark choice of being labelled hate-filled racist xenophobe criminals, or embracing their EU citizenship.

And allowing Big Brother to slip them some tongue.

Anonymous said...

technicality: what is a "judicial winding-up order"?

X said...

Usually a court order requiring the closure of a company or organisation and the sale of its assets to pay off debt-holders. I don't know how they function on the continent but in the UK it's rare to see them used outside of bankruptcy cases.

Henrik R Clausen said...

I inquired Flemish MEP Philip Claeys about it. He said:

It is worrying indeed, but in the EP it's the usual stuff. The whole text assumes that extremism only occurs on the Right. If you look at the socialist text, you know where the real extremists are. And in the meantime, Paris is burning.

Now, what has been passed here (it was voted in on December 13th) is just a resolution. As far as I understand the EU system, this is a request to the Commission to create a proposal along these lines.

That takes some grinding. Perhaps lots of it.

After that, it may (or may not) turn into something more or less similar that by then will have to be implemented as law in the individiual countries.

There should be time for each of us to dust off our respective constitutions (sorry Brits - out of luck I'm afraid) and find the articles that prevent this from being adopted.

Oh, the European Parliament passes resolutions morning, midday and evening, on every concieveable subject. This is not the most powerful things it can do - what really matters is where it has to adopt proposals from the Commission. That is where things are about to become legally binding.

This resolution is just another day at the office.

My take on the EU?

If we agree to purge it drastically, like down to 10-15 % of its current size and budget, it just might be viable.

Henrik R Clausen said...

Charlemagne, I agree that we would do well in getting rid of some 'poster imams'. I think we just may have enough criminal ones to kick, like Mullah Krekar in Norway.

One things that hinders us is the ban on sending people to countries where they risk a death sentence. I think this clause should be removed, quick.

idomeneo said...

well, well, well,'
things are getting darker by the day. What amazes me is in order to subjagate the people of Europe the way the EU is doing not only must the elites have contempt but outright, psychotic hatred towards their own citizens. THE SAME WILL HAPPEN HERE IN THE US SOON (north american union). a revolution or enslavement will be our only choices very soon.

Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep are deciding what is for dinner.- ben franklin

Charlemagne said...

Henrik you (as representing all Europeans and not you personally) are only hindered if you are waiting for state sanctioned death sentences to free you from these parasites and hate mongers.

Henrik R Clausen said...

Charlemagne, I'm actually personally against death sentences. But if other countries want to punish the terrorists in that way, it's OK with me.

I'd prefer, though, to put them into little-bitty cages and transport them around the world, showing how we deal with them.

ChenZhen said...

Interesting animated gif there.

leadpb said...

My browser dictionary gives this example for *xenophobia*:

"racism and xenophobia are steadily growing in Europe."

Who knew?

Anonymous said...

The U.S. government will be on the wrong side and not give asylum to Europeans. I'm sure of this, because of their behavior regarding the immigration debate here. I've been concerned for some time about the future of free speech on the internet, and this is crunch time. Question for techie types: is it possible for people to design an alternative internet they can't censor? Because they want the internet to be one way, just for shopping and propaganda. They tried to restrict bloggers a while ago, and that failed, but I'm sure they'll try again.

Fellow Peacekeeper said...

The Roma example is important. It will continue to expose a fundamental contradiction in the crypto-socialist development in the EU towards a EUSSR.

The creation of the Shengen visa free area is almost certainly going to result in more mass sloshing around of problem miniorities and welfare migrants. Logically we are bound to see Muslims, Roma, Africans and all manner of welfare seeking racaille shifting around to wherever its more multi-culti friendly and economically expedient. The welfare competition will inevitably punish the most socialized (and EUSSR friendly) states.

For one, figure popular backlash in the heart of the EUtopia.
For another, figure pressure to equalize welfare across the EU, and thats a touchy area where things get very very interesting indeed. Thus the Roma et al contribute to both anti-EU popular sentiment and the imperative to more EUSSR centralization.

livfreerdie said...

Somewhat OT, but I think it's good news, if I read it right:

The Department of State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Print)


Sec. 699F. None of the funds made available under this Act may be made available to any international organization, agency, or entity (including the United Nations) that requires the registration of or taxes a gun owned by a citizen of the United States.


Marian - CZ said...

Latte conservative, check this:

The TOR anonymity network

A very fine thing, it is just impossible to follow your Internet connection with it.

Of course, the commissars can just ban the necessary software and slap a mandatory sentence for its use.

Anonymous said...

Marian, that's a great resource. I'd like to see GoV and other essential blogs available through that network, and it's time to do it now. Let's say, at some time in the future, Europeans can't post directly to this blog without real risk of arrest. Well, you can't necessarily just e-mail the Baron. This blog is hosted by Blogger (Google), which is all about $$$$, not free speech. Didn't they just give it up to China? Moral of story: it's time to set up the underground blogging network now.

Charlemagne said...


That is exactly the situation we have here in the US with states always competing against each other for new business, lower tax rates, lower public benefits and the results are obvious. Those states that are most friendly to business and unfriendly to social parasites are the ones with the highest growth rates. That is one reason the Democrats (Socialists) support equalization of laws at the national/federal level and many, if not most, Conservatives support states rights. This preservation of states rights is what will help keep us free as mobility allows people to vote with their feet.

crowsnest said...


I think you're quite correct to draw attention to the possibility of a 'welfare war' (if I can call it that) within the Eurabian states.

Certainly in the part of the UK where I reside (an area that traditionally offered employment in the heavy industries) there is a sizeable proportion of the population who rely, to one degree or another, on State benefits.

These people see themselves as being entitled to benefits (either because of native status and/or previous tax and national insurance payments). It's often the case that these natives live on the multicultural fault lines, in direct competition with newcomers for stretched State resources (education, health care, etc).

It's my belief that it is just going to take one major economic recession before this house of cards collapses. Given that the UK's main political parties have effectively prostituted themselves to the EUSSR/Eurabia it's difficult to see how the will of the lower classes of the native population can be expressed without turning them into criminals.

It's a potentially explosive situation in my eyes.

Bilgeman said...

latte conservative:

"The U.S. government will be on the wrong side and not give asylum to Europeans."

We shouldn't give asylum.

How many times must the US provide rescue and succor for the nations of Europe only to see them rush to recreate the next pan-European horror?

Y'know, after 2000 years of recorded history, you'd think they'd can't push a rope.

They mix like strawberry jam and mayonnaise.

If the nations of Europe wish to BE nations, then the responsibility of bleeding and dying to maintain their sovereignty is entirely theirs.

Lord knows they always seemed ready to fight the Nazis and the Soviets to the last drop of American blood and the last cent of American treasure.

We are not their "lifeboat". They should not expect us to be. If they know that there is no safety net if they fail, then they might just start taking this struggle seriously.

leadpb said...


Each time we have helped Europe it seems to have benefited us tremendously both in economic and political terms. Europe's "pawn" position vis-a-vis Russia and even China and the ME is noteworthy also. The general disinclination of the US to avoid involvement, plus our current level of commitment, military and otherwise, dictates that it is almost inconceivable we would thumb our noses at them in time of dire need. It would be like not lifting a hand to help your neighbor when his house is on fire. But I do agree with your sentiment that if you are "forced" to rely on your own resources you are likely to act more prudently. Unfortunately the promise of socialism in *both* continents has taken that bitter pill out of the general consciousness and unreality has set in.

Kylie said...

Marian, I agree that the Tor network is a very fine thing. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

Latte, I agree that it's time to set up an underground blogging network. Thanks for suggesting it.

But I would urge the Baron and all others on our side NOT to depend on the inherently insecure nature of internet communication. What's to stop some governing body from infiltrating the counter-jihad movement via the Internet? Even as it stands now, few of us really know who is posting as who.

At the very least he and our allies need to meet face to face and set up some sort of code for emergency use.

David M said...

The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 12/18/2007 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the check back often.

Kafir_Kelbeh said...


I'm with you. This provocation must occur before the Muslim population in Europe outnumbers the natives.

Otherwise, it is most likely a lost cause. Hell, a provocation now appears a lost cause, unless on a grand scale.

But Europe must begin to awaken and soon, or it is doomed. I hope the protests and calls for national sovreignty increase in the following months.

I am very worried.

Pixel Bunneh said...

Marian, that's a great resource. I'd like to see GoV and other essential blogs available through that network, and it's time to do it now.

The TOR network is what the client, or the person browsing, uses. It's not something that one signs a blog or web page up for.

You download the TOR package which works in conjunction with Vidalia, you then run it to make your connection anonymous. FireFox has a plugin for TOR that is quite handy.

John Oddy said...

Re: 6.10 Post
I read your post with interest; your name was given to me for that particular purpose. You mention Europe but, I presume, you would not have any particular Country in mind, or have you? Europe is a big place and there’s a lot of shit going on all over it. Most of these Countries have small ineffective political parties who are against multiculturism but have little or no chance of being voted into power. Here in the UK we have The British National Party (BNP) we are starting to have small successes in local Government but nothing on the scale needed to actually make a difference now. Maybe in a few years, but by then it maybe too late and your comment about being out numbered comes into play. There are a few ex-services personnel, within the party, who are looking at different solutions to the problems of Islam. I was given the address of this blog after I posted a speech on the increasing possibility of a Civil war in the UK within the next few years. Our Government use immigration as a means to secure the Asian/Muslim vote and are blind to the danger they are embracing and in signing the EU treaty they are, in effect, allowing Brussels to control the UK. Obviously I cannot say, on here, what the possibilities of what you say actually happening but you would not be the first person to have that idea


Captain USpace said...

The EU will create riots and a big mess if this is not beaten in some court cases. The only upshot is that maybe some brave, and well financed attorneys will be able to use this to crack down on Radical Islam, which of course violates many of these items in this charter.

absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
outlaw most bloggers

license all the rest
monitor their writing

John Oddy said...

I do not think of myself as an ideologist, I know there will never be a “Perfect World” but there now exists a level of imperfection, that if left unaddressed will destroy the very core of humanity….Islam !. Islam is like a virus, it spreads unseen into the very heart of our towns and cities, it remains there, silent, growing and festering, eating away at the town or cities resources, it uses the weaknesses of the West against its host, the weakness of tolerance, compassion and understanding. All the time, at first in small numbers, plotting the destruction of those that have accepted them into their community, as their numbers grow and their strength increases, as it surely will, they test the lengths they can go to, what they can get away with. We all know that across Europe that is the stage we are at now, the sights of Paris burning, the use of firearms against the emergency services and the sight of Muslim youths running riot is sketched into all of our memories.
The atrocities such as 7/11 and 7/7 are not the acts of rationally minded people, they were committed by young men indoctrinated into the belief of Allah and that Islam must dominate. What civilised culture would allow the beheading of innocent people with a knife and then broadcast that murder for all to witness? Never, in the history of the world, as Islam been able to co-exist with any other religion and I cannot see it starting now.
This is not about racism, Islam is not a race, it’s a religion the same way that Judaism and Christianity are, it’s about the barbaric way that Islam is practiced and what it’s ultimate intentions amount to and that is World domination, that’s not me scaremongering, it’s a fact and it’s written there for all to see. Islam rules by fear, hence the atrocities and the beheadings; even Muslims are scared of Muslims so why shouldn’t we be?
In our Politically Correct society I am the villain here, I’m the guilty one. I’m the evil person who dares to question the peace loving religion of Islam. When is the west going to read the writing on the wall, how many 7/11 and 7/7’s, how many beheadings is it going to take before we say enough is enough ?. Do you not feel the slightest bit of revulsion when you see Muslims on the streets of our cities burning our flags, carrying placards demanding our deaths and wearing suicide vests ?.
I feel sorrow for those of you who think of me as a racist for I am, in fact a realist and the sorrow I have for you stems from your weakness and blindness. We have all gone through the ostrich syndrome but, unfortunately, the problem is still there when you pull your head out of the sand.
As I said Islam is like a virus, it will not just go away, it needs to be cured and the longer it’s left to fester the more sever the surgery will be to remove it. Even cancer can be cured but you have to have it cut from your body, there as to be some pain before you are healthy again.

X said...

I doubt you're a racist, john, but I do question your alliance with a party who appear to be so statist and authoritarian in their policies. Still, if it gets the big parties to actually listen to the people instead of the Kensington set then by all means keep voting for em.

The problem we still face, even in the UK, but especially across Europe as a whole, is that the big parties are not listening. The small parties that have managed to survive the last few years are listening but don't have the impact, and starting a new party is going to be about as successful as the Referendum Party was. Remember them? The small parties that already exist need support in order to force the big parties to the table - Richard at EU Referendum calls them the "minnows", and points out that when people vote for them it can very often change the result of an election.

Given the threat these small parties post I think it's no accident that Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories are cooperating on plans to use state funds to pay political parties based on their representation in parliament. It will cement their grip, block out small parties and basically screw.

John Oddy said...

I am not only a member I’m a Candidate and a Regional Fund raiser I believe in the policies of the Party and openly talk about them. Over the last few years the BNP have shrugged-off the old image of the knuckle dragging skin-heads and we are now challenging the major parties to the point where they are trying their hardest to discredit us without the platform of reply. 87% of the BNP members are ex-military. ex-police or ex-service personnel of some degree. I, personally spent 20 years of my life defending my Country and feel passionately about it, I would not, knowingly, do anything to harm it.
The main parties use politics as a business and it all evolves around financial gain, most MP s, with expenses, are taking home in excess of £200,000 although most of them are against the public knowing this. You only have to look at the shady dealings of party donors and cash for honours fiasco to see this.
The UK is being led into Europe kicking and screaming we do not want to be ruled by Europe but our own leadership will not listen to us why ?, a New World Order ?, it’s all corrupt, nothing to do with what is best for the Country.
If the BNP had our way we would leave the EU, repatriate all illegal immigrants, re-evaluate the status of asylum seekers and become a self-sufficient nation who would once again be able to negotiate in world trade. That is not racism it’s self preservation.

X said...

John, I won't argue with most of that. I simply take issue with the BNP's stated policy of nationalising industry and other statist interventions that I, who find myself increasingly libertarian, would find... annoying, lets put it that way. If these policies have been dropped or are being reconsidered then my argument is obvious moot.

These are side-issues which can be discussed later. After all, we are on the same side. :)

ProFlandria said...

I don't think we have to panic quite yet... After all, as Henrik said:

"[this] is just a resolution. As far as I understand the EU system, this is a request to the Commission to create a proposal along these lines.
After that, it may (or may not) turn into something more or less similar that by then will have to be implemented as law in the individiual countries."

Tha said, given the EU's tendency to restrict individual freedoms to serve an alleged "greater good" - generally, nannyfying government and not upsetting the religion of spontaneous combustion - this is likely to pass with the substance intact.

Upspace said: "The only upshot is that maybe some brave, and well financed attorneys will be able to use this to crack down on Radical Islam". If the national governments' actions in this respect are any guidance, their new EU superstate will likely use this initiative as they have their own national laws - with benign neglect toward "the loud ones", and with firmness towards the "natives".

Those of you who have commented about the possible need for anonymous or secure communication - that may well become a reality. It's not a bad idea to monitor the (fast changing) technology in this respect so the community is not caught unawares. In the meantime, we can avoid undue scrutiny by carefully avoiding any statements that contain all three following elements:

1. endorsement/encouragement of
2. a future act;
3. involving violence.

While it is true that the specifics of the statement can be defensible in court, an event of that nature would cause major disruption in the activities of the community. "Muslim rights" outfits are quite willing to use the law to promote their cause. Incitement to violence is a much harder charge to defend against than slander - and they have access to deep pockets.

Let's leave the raging to the Anti-Fascists and the Religion-of-Peacers. After all, we have to - we do not seem to enjoy the presemption of innocence that they apparently do. I'm afraid this goes double for our unfortunate brethren who are soon to be EU serfs...

As to the refugee question, Bilgeman said: "We shouldn't give asylum [to Europeans]. How many times must the US provide rescue and succor for the nations of Europe only to see them rush to recreate the next pan-European horror?" I think there's a conflation of European citizens with their respective nations here.

If individual European citizens wish to call it a day and request asylum in the US, they would be adding to a long - and honorable - tradition of doing so, and they should be welcome. The first permanent European settlers in the US were refugees from religious persecution. Later refugees fled wars and catastrophic crop failures. These days, Europeans almost need to be refugees to emigrate to the US - the deck is stacked overwhelmingly in favor of the Third World.

On the other hand, bailing out failing states is a matter that requires a lot more thought. The US has twice come to Europe's rescue, and she has been the mainstay of the West's stand in the Cold War. It is all the more disheartening to see how many European leaders - who presumably "represent" their citizens - disdain and belittle the US at every opportunity. I suspect that envy from an enduring sense of lost "empire", or centrality on the World stage, may lie at the root of it. It may also explain their mad scrambe to create a European Frankenstein to America's Lady Liberty (OK, akward simile but I couldn't resist).

Nevertheless, speaking as an (admittedly recent) US citizen, I think the US should - again - come to Europe's rescue should it come to that. For one, because its citizens are less and less synonymous with their government(s) - and thus cannot be held fully accountable for them (stuff for another post). For another, because as Europe goes, so may the US.

Deep breaths, everyone. We can't see the rabbit hole yet, but we can smell it. Our chances of going down into it are increasing...

Bilgeman said...


"It would be like not lifting a hand to help your neighbor when his house is on fire."

Whattayou, channeling FDR?

There's a whole heap of difference between helping out a neighbor whose house burns down once and taking up "fire watch" outside a pyromaniac's place with a CO2 extinguisher and a garden hose.

"Each time we have helped Europe it seems to have benefited us tremendously both in economic and political terms."


How, exactly?

X said...

The Ford motor company seems to have done quite well out of it... ;)