Criticizing Angela Merkel & EU


Yurki1000 doesn’t always leave comments appropriate to the post. Even so, those comments are either informative or amusing. A few days ago Yurki left a comment to “The Democratic Party Endangers America’s Cultural Heritage” post on my NCCR blog. Yurki’s comment had nothing to do with America’s cultural heritage, but was an amusing and correct criticism of Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel. To understand Yurki’s European heritage concerns, he is Finnish.

Let’s see if you agree.

 

JRH 1/26/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

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

Criticizing Angela Merkel & EU

 

Yurki1000

Posted January 22, 2019 at 3:12 PM

 

Angela Merkel – Mein Jihad

 

Could it be Merkel on Hitler’s lap

 

Merkel Perestroika Deception

 

 

GETTING ANXIOUS

 

– In a speech at the Paris Peace Forum (on Nov. 11, 2018) that was held to observe the 100th anniversary of the end of WW I, German Chancellor Angela Merkel attacked “nationalism” and “destructive isolationism.”

 

She was clearly attacking Pres. Trump and his “America First” policies.

 

She said, “We know that most of the challenges and threats of today can no longer be solved by one nation alone (by the U.S.), but only if we act together (as a world government). That’s why we have to stand up for this kind of collaboration” (why we have to oppose Pres. Trump’s “America First” policies).

 

She added, “Close international cooperation (globalism) on the basis of shared values (one-world religion) that are enshrined in the UN charters (included in the UN documents): This is the only way to overcome the horrors of the past and pave a new future” (their New Universal Agenda).

 

Also, in Nov. 2018, it was reported that the UN Human Rights Committee has drafted a memo that calls for abortion to be made a human right and all laws that oppose abortion to be declared illegal all over the world (global laws that supersede national laws). –

 

Please read more:

 

https://www.raptureready.com/2018/12/02/world-government-getting-anxious-daymond-duck/

 

– Angela Merkel was embarrassed when newspapers all over Europe published photos of her marching and smiling in the uniform of East Germany’s Young Communist Movement as a teenager. –

 

https://neveryetmelted.com/2016/07/20/angela-merkel-young-communist/

 

Count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi

 

THE PAN-EUROPE

 

– Few people know that one of the main instigators of the process of European integration, was a man who also conceived the genocide of the peoples of Europe. He was a sinister individual whose existence is unknown to the masses of our people, but the political elites consider him as the founder of the European Union. His name is Richard von Coudenhove Kalergi (1894-1972). His father was an Austrian diplomat named Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi (with connections to the Byzantine family of the Kallergis), and his mother the Japanese Mitsu Aoyama.

 

Thanks to his close contacts with European aristocrats and politicians, and due to the network of relationships created by his nobleman-diplomat father, Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi was able to work unseen, away from the glare of publicity, and he managed to engage the co-operation of the most influential heads of state for his plan, making them supporters and collaborators for his “project of European integration”.

 

In 1922 he founded the “Pan-European” movement in Vienna, which aimed to create a New World Order, based on a federation of nations led by the United States. European integration would be just the first step in creating a world government. His earliest supporters included Czech politicians Tomáš Masaryk and Edvard Beneš, and the German Jewish banker Max Warburg, who invested the first 60,000 marks. The Austrian Chancellor Ignaz Seipel and the next president of Austria, Karl Renner, took early responsibility for leading the “Pan-European” movement and later, French politicians, such as Léon Blum, Aristide Briand, Alcide De Gasperi etc., offered their help.

 

With the rise of Fascism in Europe during the 1930s, the project of European integration was abandoned and the “Pan-European” movement was forced to dissolve. However, after the Second World War, and thanks to frantic and tireless activity and the support of Winston Churchill, the Jewish Masonic Lodge B’nai B’rith and major newspapers like the New York Times, Kalergi managed to gain acceptance for his plan by the United States Government and later the CIA became involved in driving the plan towards completion. –

 

Please read more:

 

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=138630

 

THE UNITED STATES OF EUROPE

 

– It was always the aim of the European project, from its very inception in 1951 with the Treaty of Paris, signed on 18th April 1951 between Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, France, Italy and West Germany to established the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) (which is traditionally regarded as the foundation of the EU because it led to political and economic integration to a certain degree in western Europe as well as providing the basis for the modern EU) and the March 25th 1957 signing of the Treaty of Rome to establish a fully integrated federal superstate called the United States of Europe in which the concept of individual national sovereignty for each member state is complexly destroyed and Europe becomes a single , centralised political entity ruled from Brussels. Ted Heath knew this full well when he conned the UK public into voting for entry into the then European Economic Community, supposedly just a free trading bloc and nothing else. He had been briefed by the Civil Service that membership would entail the eventual complete loss of the UK’s sovereignty and our eventual absorption into a European superstate. We were sold the European project on a tissue of lies (note well please, Anna Soubry.)

 

This deception continued in subsequent decades with politicians of all parties and political shades signing the UK up to various stages of integration into the EU. –

 

https://the-bnn-online.com/2018/10/28/the-eu-has-revealed-its-true-nature-a-federalist-monster-that-will-not-stop-until-nations-are-abolished/

 

THE PLAN

 

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Coudenhove-Kalergi+Plan

 

PLUS +

 

Let’s not forget. We live in a fallen World. THEY (The Hierarchy Enslaving You) work for satan. They control INFORMATION.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=six+corporations+own+the+media&tbm=isch

 

Is there hope? Yes.

 

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+10&version=NOG

 

[Blog Editor excerpts of Romans 10 Names of God Bible (NOG):

 

If You Believe You Will Be Saved

10 Brothers and sisters, my heart’s desire and prayer to God on behalf of the Jewish people is that they would be saved. I can assure you that they are deeply devoted to God, but they are misguided. They don’t understand how to receive God’s approval. So they try to set up their own way to get it, and they have not accepted God’s way for receiving his approval. Christ is the fulfillment of Moses’ Teachings so that everyone who has faith may receive God’s approval.

 

 

However, what else does it say? “This message is near you. It’s in your mouth and in your heart.” This is the message of faith that we spread. If you declare that Yeshua is Lord, and believe that God brought him back to life, you will be saved. 10 By believing you receive God’s approval, and by declaring your faith you are saved. 11 Scripture says, “Whoever believes in him will not be ashamed.”

 

12 There is no difference between Jews and Greeks. They all have the same Lord, who gives his riches to everyone who calls on him. 13 So then, “Whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

 

 

16 But not everyone has believed the Good News.

 

Isaiah asks, “Lord, who has believed our message?” 17 So faith comes from hearing the message, and the message that is heard is what Christ spoke.

 

 

20 Isaiah said very boldly, “I was found by those who weren’t looking for me. I was revealed to those who weren’t asking for me.” 21 Then Isaiah said about Israel, “All day long I have stretched out my hands to disobedient and rebellious people.”]

 

Blessings
Jyrki

jesus saves

Report: NIF, EU, UN Drive Ferocious Campaign to Quash Israel’s Nationality Law


I am a bit disturbed and perturbed that Left-Wing Jews are shooting themselves in the foot by working against shoring up the Jewish identity of Israel by propagandizing Israel’s public with typical lies about the new Nationality Law.

 

Apparently Leftists of all nations are supportive of the Multiculturalism that destroys the national identity and culture of all nations. I would not be surprised if Jews in America also supportive of a Leftist agenda to suppress the Jewish national identity in the Land of the Jews.

 

JewishPress.com has the story of how Israel’s Left is destroying their own nation.

 

JRH 8/7/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Report: NIF, EU, UN Drive Ferocious Campaign to Quash Israel’s Nationality Law

 

By JNi.Media

26 Av 5778 – August 7, 2018

JewishPress.com

 

Rabin Square Rally against the Nationality Law, August 4, 2018

 

In the week before the Saturday night rally in Tel Aviv’s Rabin Square against Israel’s new Nationality Law, the organizers issued frequent announcements to the media, signed by the “headquarters of the struggle against the Nationality Law.”

 

According to the website Mida, the group behind the “struggle” is Anu (Us in Hebrew), a leftist NGO supported by the New Israel Fund, the European Union, UNESCO, and the Shoken fund, to name a few.

 

Anu is also behind an online funding campaign to raise money for the rally and the continued fight against the new law.

 

To remind you, the Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, enacted July 19 by a majority of 62 to 55 with 2 abstaining, establishes the constitutionality of the three historic Zionist principles: the free return of the Jews to the land of our fathers; the free settlement of Jews everywhere in Israel; and the miraculously revived Hebrew as the official language of the Jewish State. Calling these principles racist and part of an apartheid policy is tantamount to attacking the very existence of a Jewish State.

 

But the Anu-supported “Struggle Headquarters” describes the new Basic Law (meaning it is constitutional) in a distorted way, with clear post-Zionist attitudes woven between the lines.

 

For one thing, the Struggle Headquarters does not distinguish between Israeli minorities who committed to military service and those who do not, presenting the protest as being shared by “Druze, Jews and Arabs.” This despite the yawning gap between the position of a large number of Israeli Arabs, who identify themselves as “Palestinians” and pray for the destruction of Israel, and the overwhelming majority of the Druze, who are proud of their country and fight for it in the battlefield.

 

The Struggle Headquarters propaganda maliciously misrepresents the law, using a false comparison between two Border Guard officers, one a Jew, the other a Druze, and stating that “the Nationality Law states explicitly: They are not brothers! They are not equal!”

 

The new law does no such thing, of course. It certainly does not violate the civil rights of Druze citizens, nor does it violate the equality between Jewish and Druze citizens.

 

The Struggle Headquarters intentionally lies to the public, suggesting the new law “officially cancels the principle of civil equality” and “justifies inequality in the distribution of national resources,” both utterly baseless claims.

 

They also claim the law “cancels the recognition of Arabic as an official language,” when the Nationality Law, which crowns Hebrew as the Jewish State’s official language, also explicitly uphold the special status given to the Arabic language.

 

Along with the above distortions, the Struggle Headquarters is also infected with post-Zionism: “The government, deliberately, violates the international right of minorities to national self-determination as minority groups,” the campaign declares, but fails to explain what is the basis for this so-called “international right.” That’s because no such right exists.

 

Minority rights, as applying to ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities and indigenous peoples, are an integral part of international human rights law, designed to ensure that a specific group which is in a vulnerable, disadvantaged or marginalized position in society, is able to achieve equality and is protected from persecution. The concerns of international legal conventions on minority rights are not to prevent nation-states such as England, Denmark, France or Israel from remaining so, but to prevent the genocide of minorities in places like the former Yugoslavia or east Africa. In countries with a Western democratic tradition, minority rights are usually protected by affirmative action quotas.

 

And yet, the literature disseminated by the Struggle Headquarters say Israel must provide “national self-determination” to Israeli Arabs, many of whom identify themselves as “Palestinians.” This is a concept that promotes eliminating the uniqueness of the Jewish national identity of the State of Israel.

 

This post-Zionist outlook joins similar statements made by Druze former General Amal Assad, one of the leaders of the struggle against the Nationality Law, who believes the Jews do not have a unique right to the Land of Israel, as he put it recently on his Facebook page: “Where did you get the nerve to determine that the country belongs to the Jews? What is the foundation of the claim of the Jewish right and ownership of the land?”

 

Last week, it was the same Assad who caused the collapse of a meeting between Prime Minister Netanyahu and the heads of the Druze community, when he declared that Israel is on its way to becoming an “apartheid state.”

 

THE LEADER

 

One of the prominent figures in the “struggle against national law” is Dr. Ricki Tessler, a faculty member at the Hebrew University’s School of Education and chair of the Academic Forum on Civics Education. Tessler is the spearhead in the campaign to eliminate national-Zionist values from the teaching of civil studies, in favor of “universal” values ​​that correspond to the values ​​of a state of all its citizens.

 

In an interview with the Knesset TV channel, Tesler expressed her rage at the fact that the country’s civil studies books teach that “the government can make decisions because it is the majority,” protesting: “Where will all this lead us?”

 

In other words, Tessler is enraged by the most basic principle of democracy: majority rule.

 

ANU AND THE NIF

 

Anu is a federation of lefwing [sic] organizations, including Agenda, heavily sponsored by the New Israel Fund (80% of its budget came from NIF).

 

Agenda’s board included NIF’s Executive Director in Israel, Rachel Liel; MK Daniel Ben-Simon (Zionist Union); and former Israel TV news director and current mayor of the Druze town of Daliat al-Carmel, Rafik Halabi, who is one of the pillars of the protest against the Nationality Law; and the group’s director-general Anat Saragusti, who later ran B’Tselem US.

 

Between 2014 and 2017, Anu received more than $550,000 in grants from the NIF. The NGO also receives grants from the European Union and the UN, the specific amounts are not yet known.

 

Anu’s online guide to anti-government demonstrators across Israel.

 

Anu serves the leftist agenda, dedicating its official website and Facebook page to promoting leftwing demonstrations under the title “The People Are Fighting Corruption.” Anu provides organizational knowledge to expand the circle of participants in the demonstrations, offering an online demonstrations map, directing users to the locations of the demonstrations throughout the country, and providing updates via email on upcoming rallies.

 

To date, Anu has launched an extensive campaign to prevent the expulsion of illegal African infiltrators, spreading blatant lies such as that “the State of Israel expels tens of thousands into mortal danger”; demonstrations against the government’s natural gas outline; rallies against the demolition of illegal construction in Bedouin settlements in the Negev; and support for the Barbur Art Gallery in Jerusalem, which hosted members of extreme leftist, anti-Israel organizations in a venue that is public property belonging to the Jerusalem Municipality.

 

Among the more bizarre campaigns appearing on the organization’s website is “The struggle against brain-control crimes.” Anu claims that “university management retirees, together with subcontractors from intelligence organizations, fire electromagnetic radiation to establish remote brain control, to manage the citizens using microwave radiation.”

___________________

JNi.Media provides editors and publishers with high quality Jewish-focused content for their publications.

 

© The Jewish Press 2018. All Rights Reserved. 

 

JewishPress.com – Bringing you the news from Israel and the Jewish World

 

About Jewish Press

 

The Jewish Press is the largest independent weekly Jewish newspaper in the United States. The paper, founded by Rabbi Sholom Klass (1916-2000) and Mr. Raphael Schreiber (1885-1980), debuted as a national weekly in January 1960 and quickly won a following for its eclectic mix of Jewish news, political and religious commentary, the largest Jewish classifieds and special features — including puzzles, games and illustrated stories —  for young readers.

 

For over five decades now The Jewish Press has championed Torah values and ideals from a centrist or Modern Orthodox perspective. The paper has been a tireless advocate on behalf of the State of Israel, Soviet Jewry, and agunot (women whose husbands refuse to grant them a religious divorce), and has taken the lead in urging a greater communal openness in addressing domestic violence and other social ills.

 

Known for its editorial feistiness, The Jewish Press was politically incorrect long before the phrase was coined. The paper over the years has been home to colorful and thought-provoking writers like Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis, Dr. Morris Mandel, Louis Rene Beres, Steven Plaut, Marvin Schick, Rabbi Dovid Goldwasser, Phyllis Chesler, Rabbi David Hollander, Paul Eidelberg, the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, as well as former editor Arnold Fine and current senior editor Jason Maoz.

 

In 2011, the JewishPress.com website and related Internet properties were relaunched as an independent, daily online newspaper, with breaking news and in-depth articles on Israel, the Jewish People and the world. The Internet edition is managed by Stephen Leavitt.

 

READ THE REST

 

Poland Withstand Muslim Invasion Like Yesteryears


John R. Houk

© December 2, 2017

 

You don’t hear too much in the American Mainstream Media (MSM) about the European Union’s (EU) devastating problems with Muslim immigrants (legal and illegal) as well as next generation Muslims from those immigrants. What are those problems? Simply put: It is the crimes of theft, assault, rape, rioting and Islamic Supremacism in general.

 

The sad part of these problems is that the EU Multiculturalist elites are doing their best to cover-up most of the illegal excursions of Muslims causing problems. The cover-ups are a part of the Multiculturalist efforts to brainwash their original citizens to accept the Muslim migration with open arms. The Elites have been doing a pretty good snowball sell to their communities planting sympathy with the altruism of humanitarianism.

 

Yet, even with the cover-ups and brainwashing, EU citizens are catching on to the societal disruption Muslims are causing as the Western EU voters are electing more and more power to anti-immigrant politicians. Eastern EU voters so far have been very convincing as a constituency with Eastern European governments refusing Muslim immigrants entry have zero intention to conform to Western cultural norms and laws.

 

There are a number of Eastern European governments on the anti-immigration boat. Poland got my attention today from a post by Ann Corcoran on her Refugee Resettlement Watch blog. Corcoran is actually introducing an American Thinker short post about Poland refusing Muslim immigration to the political displeasure of Western EU power-elites especially in Germany.

 

Corcoran picked up on Poland’s historical legacy of King Jan (John in English) III Sobieski leading a multinational European force against Muslim invading Ottoman Turks that had made it to Vienna (now in Austria). The Ottomans were about to breach Vienna’s walls when the multinational force came to save the day beating back the Muslim invaders in 1683 A.D. (Anno Domini – in the year of the Lord):

 

John III Sobieski (PolishJan III SobieskiLithuanianJonas III SobieskisLatinIoannes III Sobiscius; 17 August 1629 – 17 June 1696), was King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania from 1674 until his death, and one of the most notable monarchs of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth.

 

Sobieski’s military skill, demonstrated in wars against the Ottoman Empire [Sobieski vs Ottomans], contributed to his prowess as King of Poland. Sobieski’s 22-year reign marked a period of the Commonwealth’s stabilization, much needed after the turmoil of the Deluge and the Khmelnytsky Uprising.[1] Popular among his subjects, he was an able military commander, most famous for his victory over the Turks at the 1683 Battle of Vienna.[2] After his victories over them, the Ottomans called him the “Lion of Lechistan“; and the Pope hailed him as the savior of Christendom.[3] (John III Sobieski; Wikipedia; last edited on 11/19/17 12:33)

 

And thus, the moral of the story is Poland was responsible for protecting Europe’s Christian heritage against invading Muslims in the past and has no intention of anti-Christian/anti-Western Muslims at this present time.

 

This cross post will use Corcoran’s intro then I’ll go strait to the American Thinker short article.

 

JRH 12/2/17

Please Support NCCR

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

The Poles remember their history, saved Europe from Muslim horde in 1683….

 

Posted by Ann Corcoran

December 1, 2017

Refugee Resettlement Watch

 

Sobieski’s Winged Hussars: “the badass Polish King Jan Sobieski led the single hugest and most balls-out cavalry charge in history.” http://www.badassoftheweek.com/hussars.html

 

….so they see very clearly their job today!

 

Longtime readers know all about the Polish King Jan Sobieski and the battle at the Gates of Vienna in 1683, but we get new readers every day and I need to continue to educate newbies.

 

We have an extensive archive on the ‘Invasion of Europe’ (mostly the modern day invasion), but it is important to repeat that Poland has a really good reason for resisting the migrants that both the EU and Mama Merkel would like to foist on the country.

 

Here it is, mentioned again in an article about Germany’s political difficulties at the moment, at America Thinker.

___________________

For Eastern Europe, Germany Is the Trouble

 

By Alex Alexiev

December 1, 2017

American Thinker

 

The inability of Angela Merkel and her putative partners to form a government has given rise to persistent calls, including from the chancellor herself, that what Europe needs now is a strong Germany. In fact, it is Germany’s unquestioned strength and willingness to throw its weight around that are to blame for much of Eastern Europe’s unhappiness with the European Union at the moment. A case in point is the growing rift between Berlin and its eastern EU neighbors on some of the issues discussed by Merkel and her potential government partners.

 

Take for instance Merkel’s position claiming that the Russian Nord Stream 2 pipeline is simply a commercial project. To most of her eastern neighbors, this is nothing if not crass German hypocrisy designed to further German business, while facilitating  the monopolistic endeavors of Vladimir Putin and Russia’s energy monopoly, Gazprom, at the expense of Eastern Europe. Or the willingness of Germany’s Free Democrats to give Russia a pass on Crimean annexation, which suspiciously sounded like an apologia of the old “might is right” axiom. Or the asinine suggestion of the Greens to settle entire Syrian villages in Eastern Europe to make the migrants feel more comfortable and the locals less so.

 

Beyond these specific disagreements, there are fundamental, perhaps irreconcilable, differences between Eastern Europe and Germany on at least two issues – defense policy and migration. Regarding the former, following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the reunification of Germany, Berlin seems to have decided that there would never be another war in Europe and it stopped spending money on defense. As a result, in a short time the German military was transformed from being the second most powerful in NATO to a weakling spending barely 1.2% of GDP on defense instead of the 2% agreed minimum. Its personnel collapsed nearly four-fold (600,000 to 177,000) and it has glaring equipment shortfalls that make its functioning as an integral force very doubtful. According to Jane’s, close to half of its Leopard 2 tanks (95 of 244) are not combat ready, and neither are 28 of its 75 Tornado combat aircraft, nor are 41 of its 79 Eurofighters, nor are four out of ten Patriot air-defense systems.

 

More troublesome than these capability issues is Germany’s unwillingness to determine where the threat to Europe may be coming from. Unlike Eastern Europe, which invariably sees Russia as a clear and present danger, Berlin appears not to be sure. During the recent election campaign, Merkel’s socialist coalition partners called for disarmament and the withdrawal of American nuclear weapons from Germany, in the face of blatant Russian aggression in Ukraine and elsewhere. This fundamental divergence in threat perceptions also results in stark differences in attitudes toward defense spending, the United States and NATO priorities. There is a palpable and growing fault line between East and West Europe on defense matters that does not bode well for NATO.

 

There is also a huge gulf in attitudes toward migration. Western Europeans cite the easterners’s refusal to take any migrants as a sign of lack of solidarity, populist prejudice and perhaps racism.  The easterners respond that nobody asked their views on opening the borders and point out the failure of western societies to integrate the migrants as a reason to not rush into this experiment. They point out that Muslims that have lived for decades in Europe, yet nonetheless voted for the Islamist dictator Erdogan in much greater numbers than their fellow Turks at home. There are also spiking numbers of migrant crimes and sexual assaults.

 

here is another powerful reason for Eastern Europe’s reluctance to accept Muslim refugees that is seldom discussed, though it is important and it has to do with the region’s historical experience with Muslims. Very few in Western Europe are aware of it, but every child in Poland knows that Jan Sobieski saved Europe and Christendom from the Ottomans at Vienna in 1683. They also know that much of Eastern Europe, including the Balkans, Hungary, Podolia in Poland, Wallachia and Moldavia were for centuries under the Ottomans and subject to infidel taxes, rapacious military levies, the boy tribute, and the depredations of the slave raiders. It was not a happy experience and many historians trace the backwardness of Eastern Europe compared to the rest of it to its unfortunate experience with Muslim obscurantism. Not an experience that is easily forgotten.

 

Alex Alexiev  is chairman of the Center for Balkan and Black Sea Studies (cbbss.org) and editor of bulgariaanalytica.org. He tweets on national security at twitter.com/alexieff and could be reached at alexievalex4@gmail.com.

___________________

Poland Withstand Muslim Invasion Like Yesteryears

John R. Houk

© December 2, 2017

___________________

The Poles remember their history, saved Europe from Muslim horde in 1683….

 

About RRW

 

Update[d] April 26, 2015:

 

A few months ago A year ago  Two Three years ago, Six years Seven Eight years ago it came to our attention in Washington County MD that a non-profit group (Virginia Council of Churches) had been bringing refugees into the city of Hagerstown (county seat) for a couple of years. Some problems arose and citizens started to take an interest and ask questions about how this federal program works. Our local paper had no interest in finding the facts, so we decided to find them ourselves.

 

One of the many startling things we found out about this very quiet effort is that these non-profit groups bring to the US on average each year 15,000 (FY90-FY03) Muslim refugees from the Middle East, Africa, the Balkans, etc, almost completely funded by the US Government through grants and contracts to these non-government agencies. Of the 168 refugees brought to our county since 2004, 125 are Muslim. Although we all have sympathy for persecuted and suffering people there are real questions to be answered about the wisdom of this policy.

 

It turns out that there are hotbeds of this refugee resettlement controversy throughout the US.  We have identified some of those.   Because the issue is much more complicated than we initially realized, we have set up this online community organizing center at https://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/.

 

READ THE REST

___________________

For Eastern Europe, Germany Is the Trouble

 

© American Thinker 2017

 

About American Thinker

 

American Thinker is a daily internet publication devoted to the thoughtful exploration of issues of importance to Americans. Contributors are accomplished in fields beyond journalism and animated to write for the general public out of concern for the complex and morally significant questions on the national agenda.

 

There is no limit to the topics appearing on American Thinker. National security in all its dimensions — strategic, economic, diplomatic, and military — is emphasized. The right to exist and the survival of the State of Israel are of great importance to us. Business, science, technology, medicine, management, and economics in their practical and ethical dimensions are also emphasized, as is the state of American culture.

 

READ THE REST

 

How Barcelona Became a Victim of the Barcelona Process


This brief Fjordman essay focusing on Islamic terrorism in Spain then expanding his understanding to all the European Union (EU) is something concerned Americans should understand the implications that are applicable to the USA thanks to eight years of Obama/Dem immigration policies.

 

JRH 10/16/17

Please Support NCCR

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

How Barcelona Became a Victim of the Barcelona Process

 

By Fjordman

October 12, 2017 4:00 am

Gatestone Institute

 

  • The Barcelona Process, promoted by the EU, has helped to facilitate a greater presence of Islam and Muslim immigrants in Western Europe — thereby also increasing the Islamic terror threat there. That result was perfectly foreseeable.

 

  • When the number of people who believe in Islamic Jihad doctrines rises, the likelihood of experiencing jihadist attacks increases as well.

 

  • It is unlikely, though, that European political leaders will point to this connection. Doing so would be an indirect admission that Europe’s leaders have actively increased the Islamic terror threat against European citizens. This is the brutal truth they do not want exposed.

 

The murders on the pedestrian street of La Rambla in Barcelona on August 17, 2017 were not the first Islamic terrorist attack in Spain. On March 11, 2004, 192 people were killed, and around two thousand injured, in the Madrid train bombings.

 

In hindsight, that attack marked a new phase in the modern Islamic Jihad against Europe. After the Madrid bombings, London was hit with deadly bombings on July 7, 2005. In recent years, the frequency of jihadist attacks on European soil has increased dramatically.

 

It is probably not a coincidence that Spain was an early target of Islamic terror. The Iberian Peninsula, present-day Portugal and Spain, was for centuries under Islamic rule. Militant Muslims have repeatedly made it clear that for them, reconquering Spain is a priority.

 

The murders on the pedestrian street of La Rambla in Barcelona on August 17, 2017 were not the first Islamic terrorist attack in Spain. (Image source: JT Curses/Wikimedia Commons)

 

Ironically, some people in Barcelona seem to view tourists who pay for short-term visits as a greater threat than Muslim immigrants who come to stay permanently. One can hear similar reactions among some radical left-wing activists, for instance, in Greece.

 

Mass tourism can potentially cause problems such as overcrowding and local pollution. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that only a few days before the terror attack in Barcelona, some locals were complaining about an invasion of tourists. One radical left-wing group, Arran, published footage of tourist bikes in the city having their tires punctured in acts of deliberate sabotage. Of course, the problem might be even greater if there were too few tourists.

 

Meanwhile, a real invasion of Spain and Europe is taking place. For years, huge numbers of illegal immigrants from the Islamic world and Africa have been entering, especially through Greece or Italy. Spain, too, has seen a spike in the number of illegal immigrants. The Spanish-controlled enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla in North Africa are under increasing pressure as points of departure for migrants.

 

The Madrid bombings in 2004 were immediately followed by the election in Spain of the Socialist politician José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. His policy of appeasement of Islam and the Islamic world was, sadly, not the first. Western Europe’s appeasement of Islam stretches back at least to the 1970s.

 

With the 1973 oil embargo, Arab countries in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) used oil as a weapon and tool for blackmail. European countries started giving concessions to Arabs to ensure their oil supply and, they doubtless hoped, avoid terrorism. These concessions were not just limited to economic affairs. They also included opening Western Europe up to Islamic culture and Muslim immigration. The author Bat Ye’or has written extensively on this subject.

 

As part of the Euro-Arab Dialogue, a Euro-Mediterranean Partnership between the EU and the Arabic-Islamic world was launched in 1995 with the so-called Barcelona Process. Its purpose was to strengthen the ties between Europe and the Arab world in the fields of trade, economy, environment, energy, health, migration, education, social affairs and cultural cooperation.

 

This Process has been in force for decades. Despite it, the increasingly stronger ties between the EU and Arab Muslim countries rarely receive critical scrutiny from the European mass media. There is even a Union for the Mediterranean, which most Europeans have never heard of.

 

As the official website of the European External Action Service (EEAS), the diplomatic service of the European Union (EU), stated in October 2017:

 

The Union for the Mediterranean promotes economic integration across 15 neighbours to the EU’s south in North Africa, the Middle East and the Balkans region. Formerly known as the Barcelona Process, cooperation was re-launched in 2008 as the Union for the Mediterranean…. Projects address areas such as economy, environment, energy, health, migration, education and social affairs. Along with the 28 EU member states, 15 Southern Mediterranean countries are members of the UfM: Albania, Algeria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Mauritania, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Palestine, Syria (suspended), Tunisia and Turkey. Libya is an observer.”

 

The Islamic Republic of Mauritania in western Africa, a full member of the Union for the Mediterranean, has the same formal status there as Denmark, Sweden, Germany, France, Italy and Poland. Although Mauritania was the last country officially to ban slavery, it is still widely practiced there to this day. Yet the country regularly cooperates with the EU on matters of importance to the future of the EU.

 

The Barcelona Process, promoted by the EU, has helped to facilitate a greater presence of Islam and Muslim immigrants in Western Europe — thereby also increasing the Islamic terror threat there. That result was perfectly foreseeable. When the number of people who believe in Islamic Jihad doctrines rises, the likelihood of experiencing Jihadist attacks increases as well.

 

It is unlikely, though, that European political leaders will point to this connection. Doing so would be an indirect admission that Europe’s leaders have actively increased the Islamic terror threat against European citizens. This is the brutal truth they do not want exposed.

__________________

Fjordman, a Norwegian historian, is an expert on Europe, Islam and multiculturalism.

 

Copyright © 2017 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved.

 

Gatestone Institute is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization, Federal Tax ID #454724565. Donate to Gatestone Institute.

 

About Gatestone Institute

 

“Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.”
— John Adams

 

Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:

 

  • Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;

 

  • Human Rights

 

  • A free and strong economy

 

  • A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world

 

  • Energy independence

 

  • Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.

 

Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts — analyzing, strategizing, and keeping them informed on current issues, and where possible recommending solutions.

 

Gatestone Institute will be publishing books, and continues to publish an online daily READ THE REST

 

Resisting Islamic Cultural Intrusion


John R. Houk

© October 13, 2017

 

Battle of Lepanto 1571

 

In an email alert today (10/13/17), Bill Warner – prior to introducing a new expose Islam video (What I Admire about Islam) – writes about how the Polish collective stood against EU Multiculturalism with a massive rosary prayer pertaining resisting more Muslim migrants by highlighting the Battle of Lepanto in 1571. Lepanto is one of those historic battles against Ottoman Turkish invasions that helped preserve Western culture from the brutality of Islamic conquest.

 

The National Review on October 7 – the anniversary of the Battle of Lepanto – gives a brief history lesson on how brutal Muslim imperialists made numerous attempts to subjugate the last bastion of Christianity that looks at momentous Islamic setbacks such as Charles Martel repulsing a then considered superior Muslim force at the Battle of Tours/Poitiers in 732 AD, then some Muslim vicious victories, another spectacular Christian victory at the Battle of Vienna in 1683 under the leadership of Polish King Jan (John) III Sobieski and then adding more detail to the battle of Lepanto in 1571.

 

Between victories at Vienna and Lepanto, Muslim military began to wane and recede back Muslim entrenched populations already brutally converted to Islam.

 

I admire Polish resistance in this present time to defy European Union Multiculturalism and prevent further Muslim twisting of Western/Christian culture.

 

Below is the Bill Warner intro on Polish activism that has a link to a Gateway Pundit report on Polish resistance to Leftist Multiculturalism and Islamic cultural infusion.

 

JRH 10/13/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Battles Have Consequences

 

By Bill Warner

Sent 10/13/2017 7:45 AM

Excerpt Political Islam Alert

 

There comes a time in life when a person must stand for something or stand for nothing.  The Polish people know what Islamic migration would do to their country, and this acknowledgement was the driver for their standing up and praying en mass in commemoration of the Battle of Lepanto. In this naval battle of 1571, the outnumbered Europeans fought and won against the Muslim Ottoman Turks. Their show of spirit and deep devotion to their religious beliefs and the ideals of Western Civilization is to be commended. I hope they continue to stay strong in their stance.
If only Americans knew their own country’s history and would commemorate defeating the Muslim Barbary States pirates who took the jizya from ships sailing the Mediterranean in the early 19th century, I would be a happy man.

 

++++

HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS Gather To Pray Rosary Along Poland’s Borders For Defense Against Secularism, Islam

 

 

Polish PM, Beata Szydło Tweets Support For Event Marking Feast of Our Lady of The Rosary, Commemorating Historic Victory That Saved Europe from Ottoman Turks in 1571

 

By Damien Cowley

October 9, 2017

Gateway Pundit

 

Hundreds of thousands of Poles took part in a massive prayer vigil Saturday, forming a human chain which spanned the length of the nation’s 2,200-mile border – through forested wilderness and snowy mountain crossings, along river banks and coastal beaches. Fishing trawlers and sailing boats joined the event on open water whilst airport chapels were said to be overflowing.

 

The ‘Różaniec do grana’’, or ‘’Rosary to the Borders’’ event was deliberately planned to coincide with the liturgical feast day of Our Lady of the Rosary (October 7th), which commemorates the landmark 1571 Battle of Lepanto in which outnumbered European forces under Pope Pius V won a decisive naval battle against the Ottoman Turks. The victory, credited with saving Europe from Islamic expansion, was attributed to the praying of the rosary by beleaguered Christian forces.

 

Impressive crowds gathered for Mass Saturday morning, followed by processions to 4,000 border locations, each selected to be several hundred yards from the next so as to encircle the entire Polish territory in a ‘’chain of prayer.’’

 

In Catholic tradition, the rosary has long since been considered a spiritual weapon against evil, and a means of conversion to Christ by way of his mother, Mary.

 

Social media accounts were soon flooded with images of the unusual event, which organizers hope will have mobilized at least one million of Poland’s predominantly Catholic population of 38 million.

 

Archbishop of Krakow, Marek Jedraszewski asked participants to pray “for other European nations to make them understand the necessity of returning to their Christian roots in order that Europe remains Europe.”

 

Polish Prime Minister, Beata Szydło, a devout Catholic and mother of a recently ordained priest, tweeted an image of her own rosary beads and a greeting in support of those taking part.

 

Beata Szydło tweet the Rosary

 

In certain cases, Polish citizens were joined in prayer by participants across the border; Poland has land borders with Lithuania, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Germany, Ukraine, Belarus and Russia (Kaliningrad).

 

The popularity of the event reflects the level of Christian faith still found in Poland along with a general sense of foreboding over what many Poles see as an attack on their values coming from a European Union accelerating into chaos.

 

“Poland is in danger. We need to shield our families, our homes, our country from all kinds of threats, including the de-Christianization of our society, which the EU’s liberals want to impose on us,” one participant explained to the AFP, adding that Islam was again becoming a threat as in centuries past.

 

Organized by a group of lay Catholics, Solo Dios Basta (God Alone Is Enough), the project was the idea of young documentary film-maker, Maciej Bodasiński, and enjoyed the support of numerous actors, sports stars and media personalities.

 

Hands Praying with Rosary

 

Numerous Poles Holding Hands in Prayer
 

Rozaniec-do-Granit–w-Tatrach

 

14 More Photos of Polish Citizens in Various Locations in Solidarity Against Islamic Cultural Infusion

______________

Resisting Islamic Cultural Intrusion

John R. Houk

© October 13, 2017

_______________

Battles Have Consequences

 

Political Islam About Page

 

What is Islam?

 

Islam is a cultural, religious [sic] and political system. Only the political system is of interest to kafirs (non-Muslims) since it determines how we are defined and treated. The Islamic political system is contained in the Koran, the Hadith (the traditions of Mohammed) and his biography, the Sira.

 

Our Mission

 

Political Islam has subjugated other civilizations for 1400 years. Our mission is to educate the world about political Islam, its founder Mohammed, his political doctrine and his god, Allah.

 

The Five Principles

 

Islam’s Trilogy of three sacred texts is the Koran and two books about the life of Mohammed. When the Trilogy is sorted, categorized, arranged, rewritten and analyzed, it becomes apparent that five principles are the foundation of Islam.

 

All of Islam is based upon the Trilogy—KoraSira (Mohammed’s biography) and Hadith (his Traditions).


Most of the Islamic doctrine is political, not religious. Islam is a political ideology.

 

Islam divides the world into Muslims and unbelievers, kafirs.

 

Political Islam always has two different ways to treat kafirs—dualistic ethics. Kafirs can be  READ THE REST

_______________

HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS Gather To Pray Rosary Along Poland’s Borders For Defense Against Secularism, Islam

 

© 2017 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.

 

About The Gateway Pundit

 


In late 2004 I started The Gateway Pundit blog after the presidential election. At that time I had my twin brother Joe and my buddy Chris as regular readers. A lot has changed since then.

 

Today The Gateway Pundit is one of the top political websites. The Gateway Pundit has 15 million visits each month (Stat Counter – Google Analytics). It is consistently ranked as one of the top political blogs in the nation. TGP has been cited by Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, The Drudge Report, The Blaze, Mark Levin, FOX Nation and by several international news organizations.

 

Jim Hoft was  READ THE REST 

 

Dutch Statesman Geert Wilders: “Islam as an Ideology does not allow Freedom”


Geert Wilders is making waves in Europe driving Multiculturalists and Muslims alike by telling the truth about the incompatibility of Islam with Western culture and Liberty.

geert-wilders-target-at-garland-tx

JRH 3/3/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Dutch Statesman Geert Wilders: “Islam as an Ideology does not allow Freedom”

 

By ONAN COCA

MARCH 2, 2017

Freedom Outpost

 

“I am sure that the last days of the European Union – it’s like the old Roman Empire – are coming. It’s just a matter of time.” — Geert Wilders

 

Dutch politician and the odds-on next leader of the Netherlands, Geert Wilders, recently made some stunning comments about Islam that are sure to make life more dangerous for him than it already is.

 

Wilders has long been a firebrand in Dutch politics, defending free speech, renouncing the works of Islam, and calling for the Netherlands to cut ties with the tyrannical European Union (EU). He’s been arrested and forced to endure show trials for his decision to speak out against the scourge of Islam on Dutch culture. He’s survived several attempts on his life, and yet he continues to speak out in defense of the Dutch people and Western Civilization.

 

In fact, you probably remember that in 2015 two Muslim men attacked a free speech conference in Garland, Texas injuring an officer before being killed by local police. Wilders was one of the targets of their attack, which explains why he is forced to travel with security wherever he goes.

 

In January, Wilders may have made himself even more of a target with an interview he gave to Europa Magazine, where he continued to decry radical Islam and he praised the American people for bravely electing President Trump.

 

Specifically, Wilders argued that Islam is NOT a religion but actually an ideology that is incompatible with freedom and Western culture.

 

“I believe that Islam and freedom are incompatible. I’m not talking about people… But I believe that the Islamic ideology is very dangerous

 

Islam as an ideology does not allow freedom. Look at almost all the countries in the world where Islam is dominant – you see a total lack of civil society, of rule of law, of freedom for journalists, women, Christians, or even somebody who wants to leave Islam, an apostate

 

Not only is the Quran more full of anti-Semitism than Mein Kampf – another terrible book – ever was, but one token of proof of totalitarianism is that you are not allowed to leave. That’s the proof of totalitarianism

 

You are allowed to leave Christianity or Judaism and become an atheist or the follower of another religion; you are not allowed to leave fascism, you are not allowed to leave Communism. And still today in Holland, in Germany, in the Arab and Islamic world, the penalty is death if you want to leave Islam

 

That kind of thinking, that kind of violence within an ideology is something that we should not import…”

 

Over and over again Wilders attempts to make the same point that many conservatives in America are making. This is not about individual people, or about ethnicity, or race… this is about culture. Islam is unable to assimilate into Western culture because the Koran and other religious teachings in Islam forbid it. Islam is incompatible with Western culture because it refuses to abide by the rules, traditions, and philosophies advanced by our culture. It’s about saving our culture, not about discriminating against another people group.

 

Here’s the entire interview in English:

 

To hear more from Wilders, enjoy this interview he just gave with Canada’s Rebel Media.

 

VIDEO: EXCLUSIVE: Geert Wilders talks with Ezra Levant

 

Posted by Rebel Media

Published on Feb 27, 2017

 

http://www.therebel.media/exclusive_geert_wilders_on_the_patriotic_spring_sweeping_the_west TheRebel.media’s Ezra Levant sat down with Geert Wilders of the Netherlands on Feb. 23, 2017.
MORE: http://www.RebelEurope.com

WATCH Ezra’s weekly show:  http://www.therebel.media/the_ezra_levant_show

Never miss a new Rebel video: http://www.youtube.com/c/RebelMediaTV
PLUS http://www.Facebook.com/JoinTheRebel *** http://www.Twitter.com/TheRebelTV

 

And here below you can see the important speech he delivered in Garland, Texas:

 

VIDEO: Jihad in Texas Geert Wilders

 

Posted by theunitedwest

Published on May 4, 2015

 

This video is about Jihad in Texas

 

Article posted with permission from Constitution.com

 

________________________

Copyright © 2017 FreedomOutpost.com

The Egyptian Parliament Rebukes the UK Parliament on Political Islam


stand-up-2-islam-or-be-idiot

Here’s a political move you won’t see to often from an Islamic dominated nation: Egypt’s Parliament (or whatever the Arabic is) rebukes the UK Parliament on the British perception of Political Islam.

 

Interestingly, the Egyptian secularists in government are chastising UK Multiculturalist Leftists for looking the other way on the nefarious Political Islamists. PAY ATTENTION AMERICANS!

 

Bill Warner cross-posts on his Political Islam website the report by  Gamal Essam El-Din written on AhramOnline.

 

JRH 11/25/16

Please Support NCCR

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

The Egyptian Parliament Rebukes the UK Parliament on Political Islam

 

Posted by Bill Warner

Nov 23 2016

Political Islam

 

This is an incredible report. The Egyptian Parliament says to the British Parliament that their report on Islam is totally wrong. They even say that they have not read any books on political Islam, which is a cancer for democracy. This Egyptian report reads like I wrote it.

 

AhramOnline
Egypt’s parliament report responds to UK parliament’s defense of political Islam
Gamal Essam El-Din, Monday 21 Nov 2016

The Egyptian parliament’s foreign affairs committee said its report aims to expose Europe and the UK’s false views on “political Islam”

 

A 10-page report issued by the Egyptian parliament’s foreign affairs committee on Sunday launched a scathing attack on EU and UK politicians and MPs who defend “political Islam.”

 

The report, issued in response to a UK House of Commons’ foreign affairs committee’s report on the Muslim Brotherhood and political Islam on 7 November, said it does not aim to defend the Egyptian government’s security and legal measures against the Brotherhood group and its affiliated militant and terrorist organizations.

 

“Our report reflects our responsibility as elected MPs to stand against a group which seized its one year in power to turn Egypt into a religious state and show the world the true meaning of “political Islam,” said the report.

 

It added that the “Muslim Brotherhood tried to steal history and turn the Arab world’s first civilian state into a theocratic state that is hostile to human civilization and the values of freedom, equality and citizenship.”

 

The report said “if Europe and the West are really keen to stem the tide of religious terrorism and the political hijacking of Islam, they should correct their understanding of all political Islam movements which claim they have a licence from God to implement his laws on earth and impose the state of the caliphate on the world.”

 

Ahmed Said, head of the Egyptian foreign affairs committee, told reporters Sunday that Egypt’s parliament deplores the UK report’s inclusion of a number of horrible lies.

 

“Our committee’s report aims to expose these lies. We intend to send it to the Egyptian ambassadors in England and Germany to stand against the attempts of several politicians and MPs in these two countries to polish the image of political Islam ,” the report said.

 

Said said “we know from history that Europe was able to move ahead and achieve progress only after it made a separation between religion and politics.”

 

“So we are surprised by the new generation of European radical liberals and progressives who defend political Islam and thereby give cover for Islamist movements which claim victimhood to spread across Europe and create a fertile ground for Islamist radicals there,” said Said.

 

The report said the UK parliament’s report offered a very artificial interpretation of “political Islam.”

 

“We wonder how a parliament that was based on separating religion from politics approves that a country like Egypt be governed by a theocratic state,” said the report, adding that “this is a setback from all the democratic and liberal ideals which formed the foundation of European civilization.”

 

The report said that “the UK parliament made a very artificial and marginal differentiation between Islamist movements that exploit democracy to reach power on the one hand, and Islamist movements that seek the path of violence and armed jihad to impose their radical ideology on societies, on the other.”

 

“All studies that have been conducted on political Islam movements show that there are no essential differences among them and that they all seek one objective – that is trying to impose a strict code of Islam and Islamic Sharia law on the world, and to launch an armed Jihad against ‘infidel rulers’ everywhere,” argued the report.

 

“In other words,” the report added, “these groups want to Islamise the entire world and they only differ on when and how these objectives should be implemented,” said the report.

 

“While a group like the Muslim Brotherhood shows the face of artificial Islamic moderation to gain ground in the West and infiltrate societies there, other groups seek the road of violence. Each complements the other,” said the report.

 

The report described the Muslim Brotherhood “as the mother of all jihadist and Salafist movements.”

 

“The UK parliament report ignores – either on purpose or due to a lack of knowledge about historical facts – that since it was established in the first third of the previous century the Muslim Brotherhood has been responsible for spreading the radical Islamic ideology upon which all terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaida, ISIS, Hamas, Ezzeddin Al-Qassam, Al-Nusra Front and Ansar Beit Al-Maqdis were based,” said the report, adding that “most of the leaders of these terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaida’s current leader Ayman Al-Zawahri were once members of Muslim Brotherhood.”

 

“This group is the godfather of all jihadist and Salafist ideologies which dream of resurrecting the state of the caliphate against the infidel West,” said the report.

 

“We doubt that UK politicians or MPs have any books about the ideological basis of this group, which is highly hostile to the West and what they describe as its “liberal and infidel culture,” said the report.

 

To press its case, the report reviews a number of political assassinations which the Muslim Brotherhood has carried out since it was established by its leader Hassan Al-Banna in 1928.

 

The second part of the response accuses the UK report of making “a big mistake” by drawing a comparison between the experience of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Tunisia.

 

“The Media and politicians in the West always like to portray Tunisia as the democratic, inclusive model in the Middle East,” said the report, adding that “this is a big mistake because facts show that Tunisia has become a fertile ground for Islamist jihadists who spread extremism and terrorism in France and Europe and that more than 1,000 Tunisians — the greatest number from any Arab country — a have joined the IS group.”

 

“Doesn’t this show that the Muslim Brotherhood ideology was behind the transformation of Tunisia into a breeding ground for jihadists,” wondered the report, adding that “not to mention that Tunisia is a small country – with 11 million people – but Egypt is a country with 90 million and the birthplace of the Muslim Brotherhood, which exploited political tolerance over eight decades to create a wide network of businesses and secret armed militias.”

 

“The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt owns banks, charity organizations and receives huge donations from wealthy sympathizers in the Arabian Gulf and throughout the Islamic world,” said the report.

 

The report also argued that the Muslim Brotherhood in Tunisia accepted democracy only for tactical reasons. “After they saw how millions in Egypt revolted against their mother group, they decided to backtrack only for tactical reasons,” said the report.

 

The report’s third section is devoted to explaining the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology and internal structure “which is highly hostile to all democratic values.”

 

“Their ideology is based on strict obedience to the group’s supreme guide, not to mention that its main ideologues, such as Sayyid Qutb, were the ones who invented the jihadist ideology which states that “democracy goes against the rule of God and Islamic Sharia,” said the report.

 

The report also reviews in detail “the one year of the Muslim Brotherhood in power in Egypt.”

 

“They exploited the collapse of (former president) Hosni Mubarak’s ruling party to exclude all civilian political forces from power and impose their rule on the country. When millions revolted against them and expelled them from power on 30 June, 2013, they resorted to claims of victimhood again, only to find an ear in the UK and its parliament,” said the report, insisting that “Egyptians stand firm against the rule of ‘the supreme guide’ and will not allow their country to become a religious state.”

 

“Egyptians are in a battle of life and death against this group, which is the mother of all radical Islam movements,” said the report.

 

The report also said that many of those who implemented terrorist attacks against the US on 11 September, 2001 received training at the hands of old and veteran Muslim Brotherhood leaders.

 

The report spotlights what it calls the Muslim Brotherhood’s “empowerment ideology” which seeks to Islamise the entire world in a gradual way.

 

The report urges the UK parliament and politicians to review “the dark history of the Muslim Brotherhood” and to verify their information about it “instead of issuing distorted reports about political Islam.”

 

“While the world has become increasingly aware of the dangers of all radical Islam movements, we are surprised that the UK MPs and politicians still live in a coma, insistent not only on polishing the image of these movements, but also propagating the biggest lie: that it is a peaceful and moderate movement,” the report concludes.

 

The report includes a great number of details about the yearlong rule of former president Mohamed Morsi and how the Brotherhood exploited this year to isolate all political forces.

 

“For all those who believe in the West that Islamist movements can be integrated into the political process of Arab countries, we offer this bitter experience to put an end to this lie,” said the report.

 

The UK House of Commons’ foreign affairs committee released its report on 7 November, commenting on the findings and conclusions of a December 2015 review by the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) on the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

The 2015 FCO report concluded that the group has long maintained a dubious position vis-à-vis the use of violence and terrorism to achieve political change.

 

The UK parliament committee said that the FCO review “undermined confidence in the impartiality of the FCO’s work” due to the “misguided appointment” of Sir John Jenkins, the UK ambassador to Saudi Arabia, to head the review effort.

 

http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/250403.aspx

 

_________________

Bill Warner, Center for the Study of Political Islam

www.politicalislam.com

Facebook: BillWarnerAuthor

Twitter: @politicalislam

© copyright 2016

 

About Political Islam

 

What is Islam?

 

Islam is a cultural, religious and political system. Only the political system is of interest to kafirs (non-Muslims) since it determines how we are defined and treated. The Islamic political system is contained in the Koran, the Hadith (the traditions of Mohammed) and his biography, the Sira.

 

Our Mission

 

Political Islam has subjugated other civilizations for 1400 years. Our mission is to educate the world about political Islam, its founder Mohammed, his political doctrine and his god, Allah.

 

The Five Principles

 

Islam’s Trilogy of three sacred texts is the Koran and two books about the life of Mohammed. When the Trilogy is sorted, categorized, arranged, rewritten and analyzed, it becomes apparent that five principles are the foundation of Islam.

 

All of Islam is based upon the Trilogy—KoranSira (Mohammed’s biography) and Hadith (his Traditions).


Most of the Islamic doctrine is political, not religious. Islam is a political ideology.

 

Islam divides the world into Muslims and unbelievers, kafirs.

 

Political Islam always has two different ways to treat kafirs—dualistic ethics. Kafirs can be abused in the worst ways or they can be treated like a good neighbor.

 

Kafirs must submit to Islam in all politics and public life. Every aspect of kafir civilization must submit to political Islam.

 

These Five Principles can be READ THE REST

 

Brexit and Norway: What to Avoid


NINTCHDBPICT000246785102

The pseudonymous writer Fjordman had his identity outed because the crazy mass-murderer Anders Breivik admired and cherry-picked Fjordman’s writings. Breivik’s admiration led the Norwegian authorities to accuse the famous counterjihadist as an accomplice by association. Of course Fjordman was exonerated of all suspicion much to the contempt of all European Leftist Multiculturalists. The Multiculturalists had cast so much disdain onto Fjordman that he fled his homeland Norway over death threats for a while. That was a while ago so I am uncertain of his current living conditions. HOWEVER, I am quite pleased he is still writing.

 

I found a recent Fjordman essay at the Gatestone Institute. The essay analyzes the choices the UK faces after Brexit and lists Norway and Switzerland’s non-EU membership as horrible models to follow.

 

JRH 9/16/16

Please Support NCCR

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

Brexit and Norway: What to Avoid

 

By Fjordman

September 15, 2016 at 4:00 am

Gatestone Institute

 

  • “[Britain wants] to be like Switzerland but they don’t know that Switzerland has to pay an enormous amount to the EU… They will have to accept the free movement of people and pay high fees and accept some laws which they would have no influence on.” — Daniel Pedroletti, president of the Swiss community group New Helvetic Society London.

 

  • Norway is the only country that has adopted all EU directives before their deadline. Norway, which is supposedly not a member of the EU, thus implements EU rules and regulations more obediently than do the founding members France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg.

 

  • Most of Norway’s laws are currently written by bureaucrats in Brussels, not by elected parliamentarians in Norway.

 

  • The citizens of Norway rejected membership in the EU, twice. Opinion polls today show that a very large majority of Norwegians are against membership in the EU. Despite this, the nation’s politicians have made the country more or less a member of the EU, only without any influence or voting rights — in opposition to the popular will, and possibly also in violation of the country’s Constitution.

 

  • The British should study the case of Norway closely. But mainly as a negative example of what to avoid.

 

On June 23, 2016, 51.9% of the voters in the United Kingdom voted for leaving the European Union (EU). The turnout was high, and the British referendum gained great international attention. Marine Le Pen, leader of France’s National Front, praised the result, calling Brexit “the most important moment since the fall of the Berlin Wall.” Le Pen said that if she wins France’s 2017 presidential election she would call a referendum on leaving the EU.

 

Nigel Farage stepped down as leader of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) shortly after winning the historic vote. Many death threats against him and his family from supporters of the EU reportedly affected his decision.

 

The complicated divorce process between the UK and the EU could take years of negotiations. Some people have looked to Switzerland and Norway, two of the wealthiest countries in Europe, as possible models to follow, yet both maintain a close cooperation with the EU. There are also concerns in Switzerland and Norway about how Brexit will impact their own relationship with the EU.

 

Daniel Pedroletti, president of the Swiss community group New Helvetic Society London, says there is “a big misunderstanding” in Britain surrounding Switzerland’s position:

 

“They want to be like Switzerland but they don’t know that Switzerland has to pay an enormous amount to the EU and accept the laws without being an influence [on them].

 

“They don’t realize that if they want a similar agreement they will have to accept the free movement of people and pay high fees and accept some laws which they would have no influence on.”

 

Though not a full member of the EU, Switzerland has over 120 bilateral agreements in place with the bloc — its main trading partner.

 

Nigel Farage does not want Britain to emulate Norway’s deal with the EU. It is terrible, he says. The Norwegian people rejected membership in the EU. Yet the Norwegian Parliament (Stortinget) has “deceived the people” and got Norway into a very bad agreement with the EU, according to Farage.

 

Norwegians voted against joining the European Community/European Union twice, in 1972 and in 1994. After the 1994 referendum, the country’s political leaders designed a close association deal with the EU. This is the EEA Agreement, known as the EØS Agreement in Norwegian. This does not cover common agriculture and fisheries policies. Control over natural resources is sensitive in a country with a long coastline plus major offshore deposits of oil and natural gas. Yet apart from a few such exceptions, Norway in reality became an associate member of the EU after 1994. EEA membership requires the free movement of persons, services, goods and capital with the EU. Norway is also a part of the open-borders Schengen Agreement, which has severely weakened checking migrants and asylum seekers across much of Europe.

 

Statistics from 2016 show that of all the 31 countries in the EU and the European Economic Area (EEA), Norway is the only country that has adopted all EU directives before their deadline. Norway retained its top position for the third year in a row. Its two fellow EEA countries, Iceland and Liechtenstein, were the worst at implementing directives. Norway, which is supposedly not a member of the EU, thus implements EU rules and regulations more obediently than do the founding members France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. This may surprise people who view Norway’s relationship with the EU as something to emulate.

 

Most of Norway’s laws are currently written by bureaucrats in Brussels, not by elected parliamentarians in Norway. Some scholars warn that the transfer of power to the EU is so great that it violates Norway’s Constitution and seriously undermines the democratic system.

 

norwegian-prime-minister-erna-solberg-european-commission-president-jean-claude-juncker

Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg with European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker, on January 21, 2015. (Image source: Norway Prime Minister’s Office)

 

In June 2016, the Norwegian Parliament voted overwhelmingly to attach the nation to the EU’s financial supervision. Critics decried this as the “biggest concession of sovereignty” in many years. With a vote of 136 in favor and 29 against, Parliament approved a bill that would tie Norway’s regulation of financial and insurance institutions to EU rules. Center Party leader Trygve Slagsvold Vedum opposed the bill and warned that it was “a circumvention of the Constitution.” The group “No to the EU” stated that Parliament had gone directly against the will of the people by weakening national sovereignty. An opinion poll showed just 26 percent of Norwegians supported the plan to tie Norway to the EU’s financial oversight.

 

The citizens of Norway have rejected membership in the EU, twice. Public opinion has been consistently against membership for decades. Opinion polls today show that a very large majority of Norwegians are against membership in the EU. Despite this, the nation’s politicians have made the country more or less a member of the EU, only without any influence or voting rights. The politicians have done this in opposition to the popular will, and possibly also in violation of the country’s Constitution.

 

Britain is a larger country with a much bigger economy than Norway. This will give it a stronger position in negotiations with the EU and others. However, it would be a mistake not to learn from the experiences of other nations. When shaping their future relationship with the EU, the British should study the case of Norway closely. But mainly as a negative example of what to avoid.

_____________________________

 

© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute. [Blog Editor Full Disclosure: I failed to ask for that “written consent”.]

 

About Gatestone Institute

 

“Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.”
— John Adams

 

Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:

 

  • Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;

 

  • Human Rights

 

  • A free and strong economy

 

  • A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world

 

  • Energy independence

 

  • Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.

 

Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts — analyzing, strategizing, and keeping them informed on current issues, and where possible recommending solutions.

 

Gatestone Institute will be publishing books, and continues to publish an online daily report, www.gatestoneinstitute.org, that features topics such as military and diplomatic threats to the United States and our allies; events in the Middle East and their possible consequences, and the READ THE REST

 

For God, Country, Family and Queen


Brexit - British Exit of EU

Here is what I believe an American viewpoint on the Brexit decision UK voters will decide on June 23, 2016. In case you are out of the news loop, Brits are deciding to remain or leave their membership in the European Union (EU). There are a bit of economics and sovereignty issues agitating a significant amount of Brits pertaining to this referendum. However, it appears to me the hugest issue leaning toward leaving is the EU is imposing European nation members – including the United Kingdom – to accept unvetted Muslim refugees from war zones in which ISIS is slaughtering non-Muslims and the seeming increase of violence in other Muslim nations against indigenous Christians trapped in a mandatory allegiance Islamic Sharia Law.

 

We Americans don’t like to be told what to accept and to not accept from a foreign capital. Even though the UK is an EU member, the Brussels capital city is still a foreign capital to Brits.

 

JRH 6/13/16

Please Support NCCR

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

For God, Country, Family and Queen

Will U.K. Embrace Freedom

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 6/11/2016 2:52 PM

 

The majority of the United Kingdom’s people currently understand that they have nothing to lose and everything to gain by leaving the European Union. They refuse to be bullied by Eurocrats, such as German Chancellor Angele Merkel and French President Francois Hollande, who advocate a single European government being forced on all EU members, along with a dysfunctional, multiracial, multiethnic, multicultural and multilingual progressive vision for society. They seek to regain the U.K.’s lost sovereign power. And, they will take measures to strengthen their democracy, national security and economy, by taking an enormously beneficial step toward reshaping their future and marking their vote to leave the European Union on June 23rd.

 

A federal Europe, a powerful centralized government for Europe, was never a British dream, however, the EU has steadily worked towards that end, even though it began as an economic partnership only. The EU now maintains its own parliament and supreme court, and more often than not, the U.K.’s demands are dismissed by this “economic partnership”, since Britain holds a small minority of voting rights within the EU.

 

The EU makes 60% of the U.K.’s laws [Blog Editor: Both UK-Leave and UK-Remain offer legitimate stats on the law issue. Determining who is correct is largely subjective to how the particulars affects any particular group], in corporate business, manufacturing, farming, oil exploration, medical research, transportation and real estate. It has also forced Britain to accept millions of people from other EU nations into its country, and too often, it has been at Britain’s expense, when poor Europeans take advantage of the U.K.’s welfare system.

 

Any properly led nation should not desire membership in the business inhibiting EU, a political entity that mandates 2,009 word regulations on matters like growing and processing walnuts for sale. There are only Ten Commandments in the Bible, 66 words in the Lord’s Prayer and 270 words in the Gettysburg Address.

 

In a desperate attempt to force Britain to remain in the EU, Prime Minister David Cameron has even sought allies in the Labor Party, such as former union chief Brendan Barber and former Labor Minister Harriet Harman. Both the Conservative and Labor Parties are split on the Brexit issue, and about half of the Labor Party sees Brussels as a protector for strikes without ballots and an ally in the Courts.

 

Noting that Conservative budget cuts are dwarfed by payments to the EU, the Labor Member of Parliament Kate Hoey has stated that the EU backs big business and tramples down British workers’ wages, even as it exploits Eastern European wages. Her view is supported by R.M.T., the left-wing labor union, and their assessment just happens to be accurate in this case.

 

In a recent Ipsos Mori poll, 58% of Britons don’t believe Brexit will harm their standard of living, and if the Telegraph’s May 31st report on EU fraud is accurate, the U.K. is certainly heading for greener pastures by leaving. More than $955 million (670 Sterling) was lost to fraud last year, and although four in ten EU officials were implicated in these crimes, only a few have been fired.

 

Compounding the EU’s economic funk, the EU is also trying to force Britain and the entire EU membership to follow German Chancellor Merkel’s example, the worst foreign policy decision in Europe since 1945, by opening up its country to millions of Muslims, who do not qualify as “refugees” in any classical definition. Thousands of these “refugees” are aggressive, young able-bodied men, of fighting age, who enter Europe chanting “Allahu Akbar.”

 

The EU has zero respect or concern for its members’ national sovereignty, and its recent threat to fine Poland $1.5 billion for refusing to accept Muslim refugees/invaders illustrates this perfectly. It also shows how much power it believes it holds, and it will not leave the U.K. unscathed from its tyrannical shenanigans, if Britain remains.

 

A fierce and relentless critic of the EU, Poland has its own “Polexit” movement underway to leave the EU. Several other nations, such as Sweden, Switzerland, France, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic have similar movements ongoing; they all have one thing in common, in that they want a Europe comprised of free nations. Also, some countries, like Poland and Hungary, assert that the current massive wave of Muslim migrants threatens both their national security and their country’s Christian identity.

 

Ironically, Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski pointedly suggested that hundreds of thousands of Syrian male “refugees” of fighting age should be in Syria fighting, rather than being dispersed throughout the EU nations. He stated: “They expect us [the West] to send our troops to fight and die for Syria, while hundreds of thousands of Syrians sip coffee — at the old town square, chatting up our women, and watch us fight for their security.”

 

“Are these happy young men really timid souls fleeing war and prosecution? They aren’t quite the heart-rending image of disheveled, traumatized refugees fleeing the horror of their war-torn home country one might expect”, blared the Britain Express.

 

In April, Nigel Farage, UKIP leader, noted that the Muslim migration was “a fifth column living within our communities, that hates us, and wants to kill us and … overturn our complete way of life.” Continuing further, Farage stated: “… the Christians of Syria and Iraq … only 10% of what they were a few years ago … qualify for refugee status because they’ve been persecuted for who they are. I want us to welcome genuine refugees, not the disaster that is engulfing much of Europe today.”

 

Britain already leads Europe’s intelligence community, and much of Britain’s national security concerns are handled through NATO, so Brexit will cost Britain next to nothing. However, the gains will be substantial, in that the U.K. can exit the anti-nation state European Convention on Human Rights, making it easier to extradite and deport terrorists, and more importantly, the U.K. will be able to assert and enforce its own immigration policy without EU interference.

 

Yisrael Katz, Israel’s Intelligence Minister, observed that the EU has lost focus of its security issues, as its leaders continue “to eat chocolate and enjoy the good life with their liberalism and democracy.”

 

Chris Grayling, leader of the British House of Commons, drives home the case for Brexit with the most important point in his May 23rd Washington Post editorial, stating: “It is much more accurate to consider the differences between parts of the European Union in terms of a comparison between the United States and Bolivia, rather than one between Nevada and Maryland. Different countries, different cultures, different economies, with huge gulfs between them[.] … The United States would never accept a situation in which the countries of Latin America could join together and decide what laws should apply in Washington. It rightly expects to be a strong, independent country. That’s what I want for Britain too.”

 

Britons __ rally, for God, country, family and Queen, and reject the EU’s globalist designed tyranny that has no regard for your struggles to secure a council flat, a doctor’s appointment, a seat for your child in a good school and the harm caused by the greatest wave of immigration in U.K. history. Reject the EU’s, the Bank of England’s and the International Monetary Fund’s failed crap economic experiment that has created unemployment rates of 38% to 48% in many EU nations. And, if you love England and wish her to survive as a unique nation, reject the dark night the EU has planned for her and embrace control of your nation and your destiny on June 23rd by embracing freedom: Vote Leave.

 

By Justin O. Smith

_____________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All links as well as text embraced by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

European Union Declares War on Internet Free Speech


Voltaire on Free Speech & Rulers

Intro to ‘European Union Declares War on Internet Free Speech

Edited by John R. Houk

May 3, 2016

 

I just finished an anti-Multiculturalist post inspired by the Gatestone Institute that focused on the EU hammering Counterjihad journalist Ingrid Carlqvist (of Sweden) and a bit of fund raising – “Multiculturalism Destroying Europe’s Culture”. As I was doing my daily Internet surfing I discovered another Gatestone Institute article by Soeren Kern exposing the fact that the big dogs of Social Media are in complete agreement with the European Union on squelching Free Speech exposing the dark side of Islam which is currently showing up Muslim refugees and immigrants.

 

The Social Media giants spoken of in the article:

 

 

 

 

  • Microsoft: Bill Gates and Paul Allen are the original names connected to Microsoft, but then Steve Ballmer became the shot caller for the computer giant amassing billions of dollars in fortune (as in over $20 billion with a “B”). Apparently Satya Nadella the big dog now. Microsoft influence in Social Media is its fingerprint on PCs and the Internet. Here’s a decent synopsis of their influence:

 

… Microsoft are almost expected to have an enviable social media presence. They have led the way to the future, so social media is an important aspect of their strategy as a trailblazing company that creates and innovates. They have created web browsers, operating systems, office applications and web services almost dominating the internet and giving people the ability to be immersed into a technological world. (How Microsoft Uses Social Media [CASE STUDY]; By CASEY FLEISCHMANN; LinkHumans.com)

 

Interestingly the owners of YouTube which is Google, are not talked about by Soeren Kern. Google was founded by Larry Page and Sergey Brin while they were Ph.D. students at Stanford University:

 

After the company’s IPO in 2004, founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page and CEO Eric Schmidt requested that their base salary be cut to $1. Subsequent offers by the company to increase their salaries were turned down, primarily because their main compensation continues to come from owning stock in Google. (Google; Wikipedia; page was last modified on 31 May 2016, at 22:47.)

 

Apparently “Google” is now an amalgam multiple corporations with a publically held corporation at the top being Alphabet:

 

Silicon Valley – and Wall Street – have a new king. Alphabet, the company formerly known as Google, looks set to become the world’s largest publicly traded company …

 

 

Commercially, when we say Alphabet, we really mean Google. The old company still represents the vast majority of Alphabet’s revenues, and almost all of its major businesses (including search, maps, YouTube, advertising and Android) still sit under Google and its new chief executive, Sundar Pichai. The rest of Alphabet may represent the bets on the industries of the future but for today, it’s Google that pays the bills. (How Alphabet became the biggest company in the world; By Alex Hern; The Guardian; 2/2/16 03.08 EST)

 

Wikipedia on Alphabet Inc.:

 

Alphabet Inc. (commonly known as Alphabet, and frequently informally referred to as Google) is an American multinational conglomerate created in 2015 as the parent company of Google and several other companies previously owned by Google.[5][6][7][8][9] The company is based in Mountain View, California and headed by Google’s co-founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, with Page serving as CEO and Brin as President.[10] The reorganization of Google into Alphabet was completed on October 2, 2015.[11] Alphabet’s portfolio encompasses several industries, including technology, life sciences, investment capital, and research. Some of its subsidiaries include GoogleCalicoGVGoogle CapitalX, and Google Fiber. Some of the subsidiaries of Alphabet have altered their names since leaving Google—Google Ventures becoming GV, Google Life Sciences becoming Verily and Google X becoming just X. Following the restructuring Page became CEO of Alphabet while Sundar Pichai took his position as CEO of Google.[5][6] Shares of Google’s stock have been converted into Alphabet stock, which trade under Google’s former ticker symbols of “GOOG” and “GOOGL”.

 

The establishment of Alphabet was prompted by a desire to make the core Google Internet services business “cleaner and more accountable” while allowing greater autonomy to group companies that operate in businesses other than Internet services.[6][12] (Alphabet Inc.; Wikipedia; page was last modified on 1 June 2016, at 13:41.)

 

In the 21st century, money is power. People this is a lot of power pushing Multicultural ideology to the detriment of Western culture in Europe and America.

 

JRH 6/3/16

Please Support NCCR

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

European Union Declares War on Internet Free Speech

 

By Soeren Kern

June 3, 2016 at 5:00 am

Gatestone Institute

 

  • Opponents counter that the initiative amounts to an assault on free speech in Europe. They say that the European Union’s definition of “hate speech” and “incitement to violence” is so vague that it could include virtually anything deemed politically incorrect by European authorities, including criticism of mass migration, Islam or even the EU itself.

 

  • Some Members of the European Parliament have characterized the EU’s code of online conduct — which requires “offensive” material to be removed from the Internet within 24 hours — as “Orwellian.”

 

  • “By deciding that ‘xenophobic’ comment in reaction to the crisis is also ‘racist,’ Facebook has made the view of the majority of the European people… into ‘racist’ views, and so is condemning the majority of Europeans as ‘racist.'” — Douglas Murray.

 

  • In January 2013, Facebook suspended the account of Khaled Abu Toameh after he wrote about corruption in the Palestinian Authority. The account was reopened 24 hours later, but with the two posts deleted and no explanation.

 

The European Union (EU), in partnership with Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft, has unveiled a “code of conduct” to combat the spread of “illegal hate speech” online in Europe.

 

Proponents of the initiative argue that in the aftermath of the recent terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels, a crackdown on “hate speech” is necessary to counter jihadist propaganda online.

 

Opponents counter that the initiative amounts to an assault on free speech in Europe. They say that the EU’s definition of “hate speech” and “incitement to violence” is so vague that it could include virtually anything deemed politically incorrect by European authorities, including criticism of mass migration, Islam or even the European Union itself.

 

Some Members of the European Parliament have characterized the EU’s code of online conduct — which requires “offensive” material to be removed from the Internet within 24 hours, and replaced with “counter-narratives” — as “Orwellian.”

 

The “code of conduct” was announced on May 31 in a statement by the European Commission, the unelected administrative arm of the European Union. A summary of the initiative follows:

 

“By signing this code of conduct, the IT companies commit to continuing their efforts to tackle illegal hate speech online. This will include the continued development of internal procedures and staff training to guarantee that they review the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to such content, if necessary.

 

“The IT companies will also endeavor to strengthen their ongoing partnerships with civil society organisations who will help flag content that promotes incitement to violence and hateful conduct. The IT companies and the European Commission also aim to continue their work in identifying and promoting independent counter-narratives [emphasis added], new ideas and initiatives, and supporting educational programs that encourage critical thinking.”

 

Excerpts of the “code of conduct” include:

 

“The IT Companies share the European Commission’s and EU Member States’ commitment to tackle illegal hate speech online. Illegal hate speech, as defined by the Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law and national laws transposing it, means all conduct publicly inciting to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, color, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin….

 

“The IT Companies support the European Commission and EU Member States in the effort to respond to the challenge of ensuring that online platforms do not offer opportunities for illegal online hate speech to spread virally. The spread of illegal hate speech online not only negatively affects the groups or individuals that it targets, it also negatively impacts those who speak out for freedom, tolerance and non-discrimination in our open societies and has a chilling effect on the democratic discourse on online platforms.

 

“While the effective application of provisions criminalizing hate speech is dependent on a robust system of enforcement of criminal law sanctions against the individual perpetrators of hate speech, this work must be complemented with actions geared at ensuring that illegal hate speech online is expeditiously acted upon by online intermediaries and social media platforms, upon receipt of a valid notification, in an appropriate time-frame. To be considered valid in this respect, a notification should not be insufficiently precise or inadequately substantiated.

 

“The IT Companies, taking the lead on countering the spread of illegal hate speech online, have agreed with the European Commission on a code of conduct setting the following public commitments:

 

  • “The IT Companies to have in place clear and effective processes to review notifications regarding illegal hate speech on their services so they can remove or disable access to such content. The IT companies to have in place Rules or Community Guidelines clarifying that they prohibit the promotion of incitement to violence and hateful conduct.

 

  • “The IT Companies to review the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to such content, if necessary.

 

  • “The IT Companies and the European Commission, recognising the value of independent counter speech against hateful rhetoric and prejudice, aim to continue their work in identifying and promoting independent counter-narratives, new ideas and initiatives and supporting educational programs that encourage critical thinking.”

 

The agreement also requires Internet companies to establish a network of “trusted reporters” in all 28 EU member states to flag online content that “promotes incitement to violence and hateful conduct.”

 

The EU Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality, Vĕra Jourová, has defended the initiative:

 

“The recent terror attacks have reminded us of the urgent need to address illegal online hate speech. Social media is unfortunately one of the tools that terrorist groups use to radicalize young people and racists use to spread violence and hatred. This agreement is an important step forward to ensure that the internet remains a place of free and democratic expression, where European values and laws are respected. I welcome the commitment of worldwide IT companies to review the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to such content, if necessary.”

 

Others disagree. The National Secular Society (NSS) of the UK warned that the EU’s plans “rest on a vague definition of ‘hate speech’ and risk threatening online discussions which criticize religion.” It added:

 

“The agreement comes amid repeated accusations from ex-Muslims that social media organizations are censoring them online. The Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain has now begun collecting examples from its followers of Facebook censoring ‘atheist, secular and ex-Muslim content’ after false ‘mass reporting’ by ‘cyber Jihadists.’ They have asked their supporters to report details and evidence of any instances of pages and groups being ‘banned [or] suspended from Facebook for criticizing Islam and Islamism.'”

 

NSS communications officer Benjamin Jones said:

 

“Far from tackling online ‘cyber jihad,’ the agreement risks having the exact opposite effect and entrapping any critical discussion of religion under vague ‘hate speech’ rules. Poorly-trained Facebook or Twitter staff, perhaps with their own ideological bias, could easily see heated criticism of Islam and think it is ‘hate speech,’ particularly if pages or users are targeted and mass reported by Islamists.”

 

In an interview with Breitbart London, the CEO of Index on Censorship, Jodie Ginsburg, said:

 

“Hate speech laws are already too broad and ambiguous in much of Europe. This agreement fails to properly define what ‘illegal hate speech’ is and does not provide sufficient safeguards for freedom of expression.

 

“It devolves power once again to unelected corporations to determine what amounts to hate speech and police it — a move that is guaranteed to stifle free speech in the mistaken belief this will make us all safer. It won’t. It will simply drive unpalatable ideas and opinions underground where they are harder to police — or to challenge.

 

“There have been precedents of content removal for unpopular or offensive viewpoints and this agreement risks amplifying the phenomenon of deleting controversial — yet legal — content via misuse or abuse of the notification processes.”

 

A coalition of free speech organizations, European Digital Rights and Access Now, announced their decision not to take part in future discussions with the European Commission, saying that “we do not have confidence in the ill-considered ‘code of conduct’ that was agreed.” A statement warned:

 

“In short, the ‘code of conduct’ downgrades the law to a second-class status, behind the ‘leading role’ of private companies that are being asked to arbitrarily implement their terms of service. This process, established outside an accountable democratic framework, exploits unclear liability rules for online companies. It also creates serious risks for freedom of expression, as legal — but controversial — content may well be deleted as a result of this voluntary and unaccountable take-down mechanism.

 

“This means that this ‘agreement’ between only a handful of companies and the European Commission is likely in breach of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (under which restrictions on fundamental rights should be provided for by law), and will, in practical terms, overturn case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the defense of legal speech.”

 

Janice Atkinson, an independent MEP for the South East England region, summed it up this way: “It’s Orwellian. Anyone who has read 1984 sees its very re-enactment live.”

 

Even before signing on to the EU’s code of conduct, social media sites have been cracking down on free speech, often at the behest of foreign governments.

 

In September 2015, German Chancellor Angela Merkel was overheard on a live microphone confronting Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg on what he was doing to prevent criticism of her open-door immigration policies.

 

In January 2016, Facebook launched an “Online Civil Courage Initiative” aimed at Facebook users in Germany and geared toward “fighting hate speech and extremism on the Internet.”

 

Writing for Gatestone Institute, British commentator Douglas Murray noted that Facebook’s assault on “racist” speech “appears to include anything critical of the EU’s current catastrophic immigration policy.” He wrote:

 

“By deciding that ‘xenophobic’ comment in reaction to the crisis is also ‘racist,’ Facebook has made the view of the majority of the European people (who, it must be stressed, are opposed to Chancellor Merkel’s policies) into ‘racist’ views, and so is condemning the majority of Europeans as ‘racist.’ This is a policy that will do its part in pushing Europe into a disastrous future.

 

Facebook has also set its sights on Gatestone Institute affiliated writers. In January 2013, Facebook suspended the account of Khaled Abu Toameh after he wrote about corruption in the Palestinian Authority. The account was reopened 24 hours later, but with the two posts deleted and no explanation. Abu Toameh wrote:

 

“It’s still a matter of censorship. They decide what’s acceptable. Now we have to be careful about what we post and what we share. Does this mean we can’t criticize Arab governments anymore?”

 

In June 2016, Facebook suspended the account of Ingrid Carlqvist, Gatestone’s Swedish expert, after she posted a Gatestone video to her Facebook feed — called “Sweden’s Migrant Rape Epidemic.” In an editorial, Gatestone wrote:

 

“After enormous grassroots pressure from Gatestone’s readers, the Swedish media started reporting on Facebook’s heavy-handed censorship. It backfired, and Facebook went into damage-control mode. They put Ingrid’s account back up — without any explanation or apology. Ironically, their censorship only gave Ingrid’s video more attention.

 

“Facebook and the EU have backed down — for now. But they’re deadly serious about stopping ideas they don’t like. They’ll be back.”

 

Facebook Censorship & Ingrid Carlqvist

This week, the EU, in partnership with Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft, unveiled a “code of conduct” to combat the spread of “illegal hate speech” online in Europe. The next day, Facebook suspended the account of Ingrid Carlqvist, Gatestone’s Swedish expert, after she posted a Gatestone video to her Facebook feed — called “Sweden’s Migrant Rape Epidemic.”

 

 

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos/Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter. His first book, Global Fire, will be out in 2016.

 

_______________________________

© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

 

Blog Editor: If GI asks me to remove this post I will comply. If you wish to share anything other than a link you had better GI permission.