Republishing of the articles is welcome with a link to the original post on this blog or to

Italy Travel Ideas

Friday, 29 March 2013

Indonesian Town Government Destroys Church amid Muslim Cheers

In Indonesia, Muslims protest the construction of a church.

The Batak Protestant Church, in the Bekasi subdistrict of Jakarta on the Indonesian Island of Java, "had been meeting in a residential house every Sunday for the past 13 years. When the congregation swelled to about 600 members, Pastor Adven Leonard Nababan applied early this year for a building permit. The church obtained signatures of 60 non-Christian neighbors, as required by law."

See if we can have a law requiring 60 non-Muslim neighbours' signatures to allow a mosque to be built in Western, Christian countries. Good luck with that!

Certainly the church had met all the permit rules, however, well knowing that local governments in Indonesia can be slow to approve them, Pastor Nababan in January 2013 "ordered construction to proceed — a not uncommon practice among churches in a country where applications often languish".

But the local authority said that the church lacked the permit and "dispatched a backhoe to the Batak Protestant Church on March 21 to knock down church walls that had been under construction".

Cheers went up from the Muslim crowd as a backhoe tore down the barely finished walls of the church.

"The pile of rubble that remained was only the latest setback to Christians trying to retain a toehold in the world’s most populous Muslim country."

Monday, 25 March 2013

We Are so Used to Assaults on Christianity that We No Longer Even Recognize Them

Muslim Prince Charles

After posting my article Islamic Republic of Great Britain under President Charles Windsor?, I've received comments here and especially on my Facebook Save the West page that show two related phenomena:

1) most people still do not understand that Christianity is the only way the West can remain itself, civilized, Islam-free and ethical

2) the reason the Western general public opinion has not been capable of recognizing or adequately countering the Islamic threat is that it has been so accustomed to the Left's propaganda, an important part of which is its anti-clericalism, anti-Christianity and assault on Christian moral values, that it has lost the ability to see even the biggest elephant in the room; in other words, erosion of and attacks on Christianity have become so normal and commonplace that they are not even noticed and recognized as such, which has led to the spread of the misconception that a religion equals another, and this in turn has made it more difficult to recognize Islam for what it is, even in the face of the most obvious and widespread direct experience through our eyes and ears.

After all, if so many people (including me until not long ago) can believe that Oscar Wilde was an innocent victim of homophobia whereas in fact he was a dirty homosexual paedophile of the worst sort, a wealthy man abusing and exploiting young working class rent-boys for sex, and that, far from being a victim of Victorian prejudice, even today he would be found guilty and be rotting in a prison cell, the high incidence of this belief in itself shows how big the collective disconnect with reality has become in the Western mind.

People have been subjected to such a brainwashing of Orwellian proportions and diabolicalness that of course, when Islam was ready and coming here to invade and submit, it found the gates of the West wide open. Nobody, or very few, were capable of seeing the obvious any more.

Now, going back to the comments to my post. I do not blame anybody, as I said it is extremely easy to be deceived by 40-50 years of uninterrupted, continuous, profound leftist indoctrination.

The comments are mainly of two types: a) they minimize the impact that even a Muslim or Islam-sympathizer Prince Charles could have, either because his reign will be short-lived or he will not have any say in how the country is run or because at least he is honest, and b) they defend the atheists' presumed entitlement to "get a say in who is to sit on the throne".

The very fact that Britain could have an Islamophile monarch is per se a sign of the enormous influence that this pseudo-religion has already attained, let alone if that dreadful scenario becomes reality.

This case also makes it even more evident than it has already been how Islam is incompatible with and a direct threat to Christianity, when you have a monarch who is supposed to have the official titles of both the "Supreme Governor" of the Church of England and the "Defensor Fidei", defensor of "the" faith - as there is only one faith that can be recognized as the foundation of any Western society, and that is Christianity - who has Islamic propensions and does not really want to defend the special role of the Christian faith.

The question about "atheist rights", which we hear more and more of, increasingly reminds me of the often-trumpeted "Muslim rights".

In advanced, Western democracies, both individuals and minorities should be protected, hence the classical theory of human rights, not to be confused with the current, leftist theory of human rights, which is something completely different, indeed opposite, and only underpins the spread and power of the state and of the welfare system, bringing Western countries to economic ruin.

The classical theory of human rights derives from the Christian doctrine of natural rights. And incidentally, this is only one of the many things that Christianity has "done for us". The problem is the widespread lack of historical knowledge of how almost everything that distinguishes the West, with its incredible civilization, from the rest is indissolubly and inherently linked to Christianity.

In the West I also include Christian populations the world over.

But the decision in a democracy is clearly taken by the majority, and most people in Britain want a Christian monarch with a Christian role: "73% said she should continue as supreme governor of the Church of England and keep the Defender of the Faith title ".

The problem is that, if we lose or dilute our Christian roots, we become nothing, the West cannot even be defined without them.

Europe geographically is just an appendix of the Eurasian continent. What distinguishes Europe is its culture, and its culture has two roots: the classical world of ancient Rome and Greece and the Judaeo-Christian tradition. Without them Europe, and by extension the West, would have just remained as civilized as the Third World is now.

The West would not have existed without Christianity and will not survive without it.

One of the reasons why Islam has made so many inroads into Western society so easily is because the people in the West do not believe in anything any more, and therefore think that there is nothing to defend, nothing worth protecting.

People who attack Christian values, which are what the West is built on and without which the West does not exist (think of the current difficulties in trying to define “Britishness” in the UK and “Europe” in the EU, difficulties that derive from the attempt to exclude Christianity from these definitions), open the door to Islamization, whether they realize it or not.

As for atheists, it is possible to be atheist and Christian, as Oriana Fallaci declared herself to be and I was until I realized that atheism is impossible to support rationally and scientifically (the alternative to the existence of God, that everything happened by chance, having such a low probability as to be mathematically impossible); so now I am agnostic and Christian. You can believe in Christian ethics and values and recognize that we owe all our civilization, including science, to Christianity, while having doubts about or without believing in God.

Saturday, 23 March 2013

Burma Gravely Violates Christians' Human Rights

Burmese troops have reportedly committed serious human rights abuses

Buddhists are not so peaceful as the Western stereotype portrays them.

In Burma, ethnic Chin Christian children and youth are coerced to convert to Buddhism.

Burma troops kill and rape Christian civilians, burn churches and homes and destroy crosses.

"Discrimination on grounds of religion and ethnicity is both deep-rooted and institutionalized" within the army, an official said.

Human rights organizations have linked Burmese troops to rights abuses and are calling on the international community to urge Burma to protect its minorities.

From BosNewsLife:
NAYPYIDAW, BURMA (BosNewsLife)-- Rights groups urged the world Friday, March 22, to pressure Burma to end a crackdown on ethnic and religious minorities after government troops reportedly killed and raped dozens of mainly Christian civilians while burning hundreds of churches and homes.

In a statement obtained by BosNewsLife, Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) and the Chin Human Rights Organization (CHRO) said the "international community" should "push ethnic and religious minority rights higher up the reforms agenda for Burma."

In one of the most reasons incidents, CHRO said a 13 year-old girl was sexually assaulted by a Burma Army soldier in the Paletwa area of southern Chin State. "A ceasefire agreement between the Chin National Front and the government has been in place since January last year, but Chin State remains heavily militarized with more than 54 Burma Army camps," the group said.

Elsewhere, in predominantly Christian Kachin state, government troops killed at least nine civilians and wounded more than a dozen others in mortar attacks from September 2012 to February, explained the the Kachin Women’s Association of Thailand (KWAT).

Though President Thein Sein announced a unilateral ceasefire in the region, "the Burma Army offensive in Kachin State has continued," said the Kachin Baptist Convention (KBC), representing devoted Kachin Christians.


The ongoing war in Kachin State resulted in the destruction of over 200 villages, with 66 churches reportedly damaged and over 100,000 people internally displaced, according to KBC investigators.

CSW, CHRO, Human Rights Watch, and KWAT testified this week about the violence in Burma during a hearing of the Subcommittee on Human Rights at the European Parliament in Brussels, Belgium.

"We welcome the ceasefire agreement, but the international community must recognize that this is only a first step," said CHRO’s Executive Director Salai Bawi Lian Mang. "So far, there has been no discussion about troop withdrawal from Chin State. As long as there is a heavy military presence, we expect human rights abuses to continue,” the official explained at the hearing.

Speaking about Chin State, CHRO’s Program Director Salai Za Uk Ling told the Subcommittee that ethnic Chin Christian children and youth "are coerced" to convert to Buddhism at military-run ‘youth development training schools’.

"Discrimination on grounds of religion and ethnicity is both deep-rooted and institutionalized," within the army, the official said. "Current reforms in Burma should focus on dismantling the institutional structures and policies that enable continued discrimination and forced assimilation against ethnic and religious minorities.”


CSW’s Senior Advocate UK/UN Matthew Jones agreed. "We see considerable challenges in Burma’s ethnic regions including in the Burmese Army’s offensives against civilians in Kachin State, the conflict and suffering of the Rohingya in Rakhine State, and continuing violations of religious freedom and other human rights [of the Chin people] in Chin State," Jones explained in remarks obtained by BosNewsLife.

"There is a need to encourage clear benchmarks and timelines for reform, and to maintain pressure on Burma to take steps to address human rights violations and engage in a meaningful nationwide peace process and political dialogue,” the official added.

The panel strongly condemned grave human rights violations in Rakhine and Kachin States, and called on the European Union (EU) to urge President Thein Sein’s government to allow immediate unrestricted humanitarian access to those areas.

Europarliamentarian László Tokés has also expressed concerns about Burma's "state policy of segregation" of Buddhist and Muslim communities in Rakhine State, and the destruction of large Christian crosses in Chin State.

It came amid reports Friday, March 21, of unrelated deadly sectarian clashes that killed at least 10 people, injured 20 others and left scores of homes destroyed.


The riots in the town of Meikhtila, 540 kilometers (335 miles) north of Burma's capital Naypyidaw, broke out after an argument between a Buddhist couple and Muslim owners of a gold shop, witnesses said.

Relations between Buddhists and Muslims in Burma, also known as Myanmar, have simmered since last year’s sectarian violence in western Rakhine state killed 110 people and left 120,000 homeless, analysts say.

The United Nations fears such incidents could endanger democratic reforms introduced since military rule ended in 2011.

In separate meetings with government and other officials in Washington this week, a CHRO and CSW delegation also spoke about "the problem of ethno-religious based discrimination in Burma. Since 1999, the US has designated Burma a 'country of particular concern’ for what it views as the country's poor record on freedom of religion or belief.

Next week a CHRO delegation was to meet with legislators, government officials, and staff at Canada’s newly-established Office of Religious Freedom, to discuss the tensions in Burma, the rights activists said.

Thursday, 21 March 2013

Islamic Republic of Great Britain under President Charles Windsor?

Queen Elizabeth II

The UK's Queen Elizabeth II has unfortunately been ill with gastroenteritis recently.

Understandably this has started speculations, I hope premature, about what could happen in case of her death.

I like her, and I wish her a very long life.

Who will succeed the Queen is a very worrisome question. I dread to think of her son and heir to the throne Prince Charles as the King, not only because of his, shall we say, lack of grasp of reality (Oriana Fallaci, the Italian best-selling author who, with her book The Rage and the Pride (Amazon USA) , (Amazon UK) , was post 9/11 among the first to alert the West to the dangers of Islam, called him "babbeo", a Tuscan term which could be reserved for the village idiot), but even more importantly because he has repeatedly made it obvious that he is not a Christian faithful, and that he keeps an "open mind" on different religious faiths.

How can that be reconciled to his future status, if he becomes king, as the "Supreme Governor" of the Church of England?

If he is consistent he should refuse to be the next monarch.

To obviate this problem he famously said, as found on his official website: "I personally would rather see it [his future role] as Defender of Faith, not the Faith", meaning all faiths and not just Christianity.

But the vast majority of British people fortunately do not want that:
Almost 80% of people in England agree the Queen still has an important faith role, a BBC poll suggests.

In a poll by Comres to coincide with the Queen's Diamond Jubilee, 79% of respondents said the monarch's religious role remained relevant.

Meanwhile, 73% said she should continue as supreme governor of the Church of England and keep the Defender of the Faith title first given to Henry VIII.
Charles' own website shows that his connections to Islam are very strong:
The Prince has given many speeches on the need for greater understanding between different religions. In March 2006, His Royal Highness addressed over 800 Islamic scholars at the Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, and called for greater dialogue between the three Abrahamic faiths: Islam, Christianity and Judaism. The Prince was awarded an honorary doctorate from the university for his work to encourage inter-faith dialogue and was the first Western man to receive this honour.

During the same overseas tour with The Duchess of Cornwall, His Royal Highness repeated his call at Saudi Arabia’s most senior Islamic University, the Imam Muhammad bin Saud University in Riyadh, the first Christian to speak there.

His Royal Highness also set up The Prince’s School for Traditional Arts in Shoreditch, London, to bring a wider appreciation of the arts and craft skills which have deep roots in all the major faith traditions.

The school teaches Islamic architecture, icon painting, Islimi and Arabesque craft, and stained glass skills to pupils of all religions and backgrounds. The school has developed outreach and education programmes for young people and is also working with a number of governments in Arab and Asian countries to build links with institutions.
And it doesn't end there. The Boston Globe wrote in November 2005 (via Jihad Watch):
The Prince of Wales was at the White House last week, hoping, the Daily Telegraph reported, ''to convince President Bush of the merits of Islam . . . because he thinks the United States has been too intolerant of the religion since Sept. 11, 2001." This is a drum Prince Charles has been beating for years. In 1993, for example, he scolded those in the West who peddled ''unthinking prejudices" about Muslim culture -- for example, ''that sharia law of the Islamic world is cruel, barbaric, and unjust." Two months after 9/11, he was lambasting the American attitude toward Islam as ''too confrontational."
Islam scholar and political activist Robert Spencer also has this in Jihad Watch:
Bonnie Prince Charlie: East has what the West lacks.

The East, that is, Islam, or at least Sufi mysticism. Attending a whirling dervish ceremony in Turkey, Charles waxed enthusiastic:
When they had finished the Prince gave a speech on Rumi’s appeal in the 21st century. “Whatever it is, it seems to me that Western life has become deconstructed and partial.” The East, on the other hand, had given us “parables of the soul”.
Islam scholar Daniel Pipes offers a long catalogue of reasons that make him wonder whether Prince Charles is a convert to Islam.

I can't imagine many things worse for a future (or present, for that matter) British monarch to utter than what Prince Charles said to an audience of scholars for the 25th anniversary of the University of Oxford's Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, "which attempts to encourage a better understanding of the culture and civilisation [sic] of the religion", organization of which he is patron: "Follow the Islamic way to save the world".

If you look at the photos of students accompanying the article and, even more, if you read the comments to it, you'll notice that that speech didn't go down very well.

Some little pearls representative of the many more disparaging comments: "Must be the medication he's on for his chest Infection.", "And this guy will be your future king,be afraid very afraid.", "'Follow the Islamic way to save the world,' Does that include honour killings and stonings and public executions for gays Charlie?", "When Charles is crowned King, he will have to swear to be the Defender of the Faith - and that is the Christian faith, not Islam.", "to come out with this is utter insanity", "Just shows you how out to lunch he is!!!", "Go back and talk to the trees!", "It really amazes me that the citizens of this country put up with the thought of this man being the next King of England.", "Now tell me he's not crazy!", "Who are the fools who think he is worth a penny of the taxpayer's money?", "I also find it disturbing that you, as Head of the Church in a Christian country, would single out another religion in the way that you have. Really Sir - your comments are 'unhelpful' at best.", "'we cannot exist on our own without the intricately balanced web of life around us. Islam has always taught this and to ignore that lesson is to default on our contract with creation.' Yes Charles but then can you explain why it is then that some followers of Islam spend most of their time trying to obliterate some of this finely balanced web? Get a grip Sir, you are paid for out of British Taxpayers Money and you represent people such as those killed and maimed in the July bombings. If you feel such a fan of Islam then why not go visit the relatives of those people and try explaining to them the fine balance that you talk about.", "I cannot believe that a future king and defender of the faith, christainity , church of england , could come out with such garbage. I sincerly hope he does NOT become our king.", "Prince Charles a 'practising Christian' ???!!! Says who?", "I pray that this man will NEVER sit on the throne of the United Kingdom!", "And this from the man who may become the head of the Church of England? God help us all.", "If he wasn't so stupid he'd be a joke.", "Who would not be a Republican after reading this?", "He shames our country.", "Could the potential head of a country possibly be more out of touch with his people?", "Where does he get the idea that Islamic spiritual principles protect the environment? We have just returned from a holiday in Egypt (Cairo and Alexandria) the atmospheric pollution and discarded refuse was unbelievable.", "I think that Islam needs to follow the world actually..With people like this bloke at the helm I grieve for this Christian Nation.", "Thank God there's a chance the succession to the throne will skip a generation.", "How differently things might have turned out if this practising Christian had remembered the commandment - Thou shalt not commit adultery. Christian values made Britain great. It is very sad how those values have been eroded over the years.", "We are the plebs who keep him and his mistress in the luxury they're acustomed to!! Time to say NO - think of the damage he's going to do, IF he ever becomes King.", "The prince apparently lives in some kind of parallel universe. As King, he will be "Supreme Governor" of the Church of England, and here is on spouting on and on about Islamic values! Championing an Islamist cause is a strange role indeed for this man, but perhaps not surprising considering how weird and unsuccessful his life has been to date. He needs a reality check imho.", "He is an outright embarrassment. Why doesn't he just go ahead and convert to Islam already instead of being the royal Dhimmi that he is".

And this comment from an Aussie nicely sums up my own feelings: "I do hope the Queen sticks around for another 30 or so years", or more.

I wonder, if there was a public vote, say a referendum on his accession to the throne, whether Prince Charles would be the choice of the people. I very much doubt it.

Wednesday, 20 March 2013

Immigrants Commit Ten Times More Rapes than Italians

South American immigrants to Italy

Ah, the joys of mass immigration and multiculturalism! From La Repubblica, latest news from Rome:
Rome police have intensified their controls to stop pickpocketing in the areas surrounding the Vatican and the historic centre, that in the last several days have been frequented by hundreds of thousands of pilgrims.

The carabinieri in a few hours arrested 14 pickpockets involved in stealing from the pockets and backpacks of tourists who have arrived in the capital from all over the world.

The plainclothes police are still used on buses, metro trains, near crowded squares and monuments, to ensure the safety of visitors.

The thieves, aged between 15 and 46 years, are all foreigners, mostly nomads.

All the stolen goods, cameras, smart phones, wallets containing cash and credit cards, were returned to the victims. Those arrested, charged with aggravated theft, will be tried straight away.
Only a month ago a 46-year-old Chinese man was caught thanks to a CCTV camera and arrested for stealing the faithful's offerings from a church's collection boxes near Verona on at least three separate occasions.

Official statistics released in 2009 by the Italian Interior Ministry show that 60 percent of all rapes in Italy are committed by immigrants, who therefore, being only 6-7 percent of the country's population, commit rape 10 times more than Italians.

Among immigrant groups, the nationalities committing most rapes are, in order, Romanians, Moroccans, Albanians.

In Italy immigrants commit such a disproportionate number of crimes, ranging from petty thieving to assault, rape and murder, that an Italian website entirely devoted to this issue has been created, Tutti i Crimini degli Immigrati (All the Immigrants' Crimes). Its tagline is "The others talk about integration, we are just showing it to you".

The site is a catalogue of daily horrors, from filthy Chinese restaurants that seriously jeopardize the health of their customers to a drunk Moroccan, unemployed and without fixed abode, who Thursday evening smashed the window of a crowded Milanese restaurant shouting: "I want to eat for free".

One crime that I found particularly cowardly, cruel and repulsive is that reported by the Italian news agency ANSA about the arrest yesterday of 75 South American immigrants who used large-size breeds of dogs, like St. Bernard, Great Dane, Dog de ​​Bordeaux, Neapolitan Mastiff and Labrador, as drug carriers.

The animals were subjected to surgery and their entrails were filled with pure cocaine to be exported. The drug was wrapped in layers of different substances impenetrable to X-rays. Upon arrival at the destination the dogs were killed and cut up to retrieve the cocaine.

The estimate is that 50 dogs have been used this way, and only one was saved.

The so-called pandillas, organized violent gangs of Latinos who are involved not only in common crimes but also in international drug trafficking in northern Italy, have in recent years become an increasingly worrying phenomenon in Italy.

This new police investigation has for the first time demonstrated the existence of a link between the pandillas and the emissaries of the South American cartels with whom the pandillas were in direct contact to procure large quantities of cocaine.

Why we leave our borders open to this scum is beyond comprehension.

Sunday, 17 March 2013

Video of Pro-Israel Activists Attacked

Video of Pro-Israel activists verbally and physically attacked for peaceful counter-protest at Anti-Israel Protest in Oakland, California.

Football Authorities Are the New Self-Appointed Thought Police

The 20-year-old Greek football player Giorgos Katidis, AEK Athens midfielder, has been banned for life from all national teams by Greece's Football Association after he stretched his arm and gave what looked like a Nazi salute to supporters in celebrating his winning goal during a match at the Athens Olympic Stadium.

Giorgos Katidis has been verbally attacked by political parties and fans as well, also in view of the fact that Sunday is the 70th anniversary of Greek Jews' deportations to Nazi concentration camps during World War II.

The real fascists here are those who banned him. The Greek FA said in a statement: "The player's action to salute to spectators in a Nazi manner is a severe provocation, insults all the victims of Nazi bestiality and injures the deeply pacifist and human character of the game".

Incredibly severe words and terribly harsh punishment for a 20-year-old who denied he gave a Nazi salute and said he would not have made the gesture if he had known what it meant, adding that he was only pointing at his team mate Michalis Pavlis in the stands to dedicate the goal to him, who is fighting against health problems.

The coach of Katidis' team AEK Athens, Ewald Lienen, supported him, saying that he is a non-political young kid, who did not know what he was doing and cried in the dressing room after seeing the reaction.

Have the football authorities, in Greece as in Britain and all over Europe, appointed themselves as guardians of political correctness? Does football now have to police thought and speech, in an Orwellian fashion?

And, crucially, would Giorgos Katidis have been banned for life, if he had given the communist clenched fist salute?

Globally, communist regimes killed 94 million people, as opposed to the 11 million killed by Nazism.

The double standard is cowardly and revolting.

Tuesday, 12 March 2013

Media Try to Report Lars Hedegaard’s New Address after His Attempted Assassination

Lars Hedegaard


Two newspaper reporters, following a van moving Danish anti-Islam activist Lars Hedegaard’s possessions to a new address following his attempted assassination on his own doorstep, tried to report the route taken by the van until the police stopped them:
Cynical as I am about the media’s stance toward critics of Islam, even I was taken aback by an article that was posted Thursday evening on the website of the Danish newspaper Ekstra Bladet, and that I assume appeared in Friday’s print edition.

Headlined “Lars Hedegaard moves” and written by Bo Poulsen, the article began by informing readers that on the previous day the possessions of the Islam critic, who survived an assassination attempt last month at his apartment in the Copenhagen suburb of Frederiksberg, had been loaded into a moving van and driven off. The article is accompanied by a picture of the moving van outside Hedegaard’s former residence.

Here’s the kicker. Two Ekstra Bladet staffers, presumably Poulsen and a photographer, were in a car watching the moving men load the van, after which they followed it. And Poulson – here it is – actually describes the route taken by the van. If you plot the course of the van on Google Maps, to be sure, it looks rather meandering, as if the moving men were aware of the two reporters on their tail and were trying to shake them off.

Fortunately, the police intervened. Perhaps the moving men alerted them to the problem. In any event, a motorcycle cop pulled over the reporters’ car. Poulsen is snide about it, describing the intervention sarcastically as belejligt – meaning “timely” or “convenient.” Poulsen is obviously indignant about the injustice of it all. “Without any justification, the driver was asked to show his driver’s license, even as they could see the moving van disappear over the horizon. After a few minutes the officer returned and said that everything was in order and that they could drive on.”

The reporters did so – but the cop followed close behind. After a short while he pulled them over a second time and “said in a not particularly convincing manner that he would like to see the driver’s license again, because ‘We can see that it’s been used in some connection or other, so we should double-check it.’” Another five minutes or so went by. Then the cop came back with the license, pronounced again that everything was in order, and told the reporters that they were free to continue on their way.

“The two stops,” Poulsen writes with what certainly reads like righteous indignation, “had now detained Ekstra Bladet‘s reporters for over ten minutes, and the distinctively green moving van was now far over the hills.”


It’s plain as day that Poulsen and his colleague were fully prepared to follow that van all the way to its destination, take a picture, and print the address – which would, of course, have been exceedingly helpful to anyone planning to make a second attempt on Hedegaard’s life, and would utterly have defeated the entire purpose of his move.

The very idea of following that van with the intention of revealing Hedegaard’s new address is beyond vile. It is a profoundly mischievous and potentially deadly act. Yet Poulsen seems incapable of imagining that he is doing anything remotely inappropriate. The tone of his article is that of a citizen – and member of the fourth estate – who has been deeply wronged by the law-enforcement establishment, in league with, and doing the bidding of, a racist, Islamophobic Enemy of the People.
The clear implication of Poulsen’s article is that the police officer’s conduct was thoroughly unacceptable – that he had far exceeded his legitimate duties – and that any reasonable newspaper reader will feel the same way.

I was, as I say, thrown by Poulsen’s article. I shouldn’t have been. The unblushing zeal with which Norwegian journalists, in the wake of the Breivik atrocities, sought to link honest critics of Islam with a mass murderer provided a definitive demonstration of just how hostile many members of their profession are toward those of us who strive to tell the not-so-pacific truth about the Religion of Peace. Given what happened post-Breivik, it shouldn’t be surprising that a member of the mainstream media, whether in Norway or Denmark or anywhere else in Europe or North America, would be ready, willing, and eager to report in detail the movements of a van bearing the household goods of a septuagenarian fleeing his home because jihadists are out to murder him. Out to murder him, note well, because he – unlike the cowardly so-called journalists trailing the van – has the courage to speak the truth.

Poulson’s article closes with a simple statement: “Lars Hedegaard did not wish to speak to Ekstra about his change of address.” No kidding! All I can say is, good for the Danish police, and shame on Poulsen and Ekstra Bladet.

The Culture War Needs to Be Fought

Peter Tatchell

Because cultural change precedes political change, and the Left is currently winning on both fronts, we cannot afford to surrender to it on the culture wars, which include the homosexualist agenda of gay marriage and adoption.

It is true that the anti-Islam coalition is broader than the one against cultural Marxism, and includes homosexualists in it, but the latter are unreliable allies. They are against Islam not because they understand or care about the threat Islam represents to the West, but simply because they are only concerned about their own immediate interest, which is the normalization of homosexuality.

For that reason, because they do not think of the far-reaching consequences of the Islamization of the West, homosexualists are anti-Christianity as well as anti-Islam.

By demanding marriage and adoption for gays, homosexual activists know that they can reach and influence the new generations into their way of thinking.

The number one leader of the UK LGBT movement Peter Tatchell (who incidentally advocates lowering the age of consent, repeatedly defended man-boy sex, supported relaxation of laws against pornography "arguing that porn can have some social benefits, and he has criticised what he calls the body-shame phobia against nudism, suggesting that nudity may be natural and healthy for society") publicly says that, without repression of homosexuality and what he calls "heterosexual proselytising", everyone or nearly everyone in society would be bisexual:
Q: What's the difference between heterosexual and homosexual sex? A: A few inches of flesh...

If homosexual desire is this widespread in a homophobic society, imagine how much more common it would be in a gay-positive culture. With the cultural taboos removed, nearly everyone would savour its delights.
That's where they want all of us to get to.

I wonder how many other "delights" Tatchell has in store for us, once the new situation of the "cultural taboos removed" will give him free rein to imagine and publicly profess support for more of them.

I suspect that many people who support or at least do not oppose same-sex marriage are not aware of the long-term goals of the LGBT movement, and of how its goals are incompatible with those of the majority of the people.

Monday, 11 March 2013

Cultural Change Comes Before Political Change

Assault on the Culture from DHFC on Vimeo.

The Left is winning politically because it has won culturally.

The brilliant Antonio Gramsci, who co-founded the Italian Communist Party in 1921, developed his theory of hegemony: before there could be any radical change or revolution, there had to be first a total change in and control of the culture, so that the new, emerging dominant ideas would lead to the poltical revolution.

The Left has put that into practice, getting control of the media, universities, film industry (particularly Hollywood), education and entertainment sectors and in so doing giving rise to new generations with different ideas.

The real conservatives now must take back the culture or create a parallel one to reach the future generations.

Winning the Culture War —- And the Next Generation, from FrontPage Magazine:
Editor’s note: Below is the video of the panel discussion “Assault on the Culture,” featured at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s 2013 West Coast Retreat. The event was held February 22nd-24th at the Terranea Resort in Palos Verdes, California. A transcript of the discussion follows.

Mark Tapson: As your mutual friend, the late great Andrew Breitbart, was fond of pointing out, politics flows downstream from culture. And the results of the last election confirm that. Conservatives lost last November in the political arena because for decades the radical Left has laid the groundwork for it in the cultural arena.

There’s no way the radical and insubstantial Barack Obama would ever have been taken seriously as a presidential candidate, much less be elected to two terms in the White House, if the Left had not previously and successfully infiltrated the key cultural arenas — education, the news media and entertainment — and spent decades indoctrinating generations. Our task now is to retake the culture or create a parallel one, deprogram that indoctrination, and seduce subsequent generations to a renewed vision of American exceptionalism.

So, gentlemen, what are the symptoms of the assault on the culture? And what is the cure?

We’ll begin with Ron.

Ron Radosh: As the moderator mentioned — I started out, as David did, as a young Marxist. And let me take a page from Marx. Just [as] people have learned that the Left organizes around the Alinsky playbook, here’s another leftist we can learn something from — the brilliant Italian communist Antonio Gramsci, who developed a theory of hegemony. He argued that before there could be any radical change or revolution, which is what he desired, there had to be first a total change in and control of the culture, so that the dominant ideas that would emerge would be those that would lead to the potential for revolutionary action.

He was really onto something. He realized correctly that you had to wage what he called, in his Marxist terminology, a war of position to demand and create hegemonic control of the culture, so that the majority of people think alike and then would be ripe for and become vehicles for creating a revolution.

Well, the problem is, in this country — to make it very simple — that even if we win elections — and we are winning it in state and local level, but not in the national level — even if we win elections, the culture is at present controlled by the political Left. Have no doubts about that.

The first thing — look at the polls and the studies that have been done in the past year. I meant to bring it with me, but I can just mention it without reading through what this professor found out, from a very finely tuned study. He studied the majority of liberal arts universities and colleges in the United States. And he found out that almost 80, 90 percent of the faculty define themselves as liberal or radical and on the left. And you can be sure that in the humanities — history, philosophy, political theory — the professors there are almost entirely on the left.

Undoubtedly you’ve all seen the recent studies of how many faculty members in the major Ivy universities gave to the Romney campaign. They looked at Harvard and Princeton and Yale. And I think at Harvard, everybody gave — 98, 99 percent gave to Obama. And there were, I think, two faculty members — two people employed by Harvard — who gave to Romney; one was a janitor.


So, this is the reality we’re facing.

Now, I was supposed to talk — I’ve been on a one-man campaign. And instead of giving you everything I said — because there’s just no time — all you have to do is blog, put it on Google — Ron Radosh on Oliver Stone. And you will have maybe 10 recent articles come up. And I’ve been on a one-man campaign against what I think is a major turning point in the culture. Starting a few months ago, on the Showtime Network owned by CBS, Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick have put together a 10-part documentary series that is now at an end, but you can still watch it on-demand. And that is now going to be shown throughout our high schools and colleges — Oliver Stone’s “Untold History of the United States.”

If you have seen any of it — and I don’t know how many of you want to be masochists and watch it — it is horrendous. It is — and I am not exaggerating — the exact KGB Soviet propaganda history of the United States as it was written by the KGB in the 1950s and ’60s.

Indeed, when I was growing up, the first book that said the United States was the evil power in the world and responsible for the then-ongoing Cold War was a little-known book by a Communist — who was one of the Communist Party members of the United States who infiltrated the OSS during the war and was a top officer in the OSS — a man named Carl Marzani, who was a secret member of the Communist Party and later, we found out, paid by the KGB, and actually a paid agent of theirs — he published a book subsidized by the KGB — this is how he got the money to publish independently — called “We Can Be Friends.”

And that book outlined the theory that the United States — there could’ve been peace with the Soviet Union if the United States had done what Stalin wants. Because Stalin was a good guy. Truman, who then President, was a fascist, which –


You have to remember, the Communists in America called Harry Truman a fascist. Not even a conservative Republican, but a fascist — creating a fascist America. And he outlined the theory in this book.

And, lo and behold — I watched Oliver Stone’s first five episodes; I couldn’t go beyond that. I know what’s in them; I read the [synopsis] in David Horowitz’s FrontPage. I’m not going to torture myself that much. But I watched the first five. It was exactly the argument, with the same quotations and the same facts, in the same order, as this 1952 book by this Communist KGB agent.

And they are — you have to realize this is a turning point. If something like this had been produced and tried to be shown when John F. Kennedy was President, or in the years after Kennedy — even, I think, when Bill Clinton was President — first they would not have been able to get it aired in a major network. It would’ve been attacked all over as outright distortions of history, as Communist propaganda, as an embarrassment.

What has happened? Just the reverse. They have been touring — up to the present, and still going on every weekend — college after college in the United States, where they speak to thousands of students, show them one episode, and then talk and answer questions. They are getting phenomenal attention. Both of them have been on every major TV and radio talk show you can think of, including, I’m sorry to say, Mike Huckabee, who sang their praises and thanked them for doing such a wonderful job in educating our students in the history of the United States. Either Mike Huckabee is dumb or he just got something handed to him by his staff and didn’t really watch it.

So this is what we’re against. Let me just give you one brief example, because I only have two minutes left. The hero of the Stone TV series is the late Vice President — before that Secretary of Commerce — Vice President and then Secretary of Commerce, who Truman fired for being an appeaser of the Soviets, Henry A. Wallace. The theory of their TV show is that had Henry A. Wallace successfully become President, there would’ve been no Cold War, we would’ve had peace with Russia, we would’ve had total income redistribution, we would have an equitable, fair, social democratic America. And everything would’ve been roses. As it was, this was failed because of the political bosses in the rightwing corporations who fought Wallace and stymied him.

Well, who was Henry Wallace? He was a naïve, classic dupe. And just to give you the one incident that says it all — when he was Secretary of Commerce, still in the President’s cabinet, he had a secret meeting with the head of the KGB, the KGB station chief in Washington, DC. And he went to see Anatoly Gorsky. And he said to him — you know, we’re having an internal battle in the administration. Truman and all these advisors around him want to get tough with the Russians, they want to stand up to Stalin. Can you help me out and give us support and ammunition, so we can defeat these anti-Soviet forces?

And he goes to the KGB station chief to ask for help in settling an internal administration dispute, while he’s in the President’s cabinet. The man, in other words, was either a fool or a traitor, or just a total idiot. Or maybe all three.

And this is the man that students and people in America are being told, week by week, is the unsung hero who should’ve been the President of the United States instead of all the reactionaries who followed him.

We have a fight to wage. It’s a fight to change the culture, to change the way the truth about our past is taught. It’s something that has to be carried out. It is extremely important. And if not, you’re going to see a whole new generation mis-educated, as Stone and Kuznick are doing now, with the most vile, old kind of Communist propaganda. And that will be what they think of the United States. They will come out learning the evil power in the world is the United States. And just as we should’ve appeased the Soviets then, we have to now reach out and honor the wishes of the Islamists who have something to say.

I learned yesterday, the great Iranian-American filmmaker who did — what’s the name of the movie about the woman who was stoned? Stoning of Soraya — he told me yesterday that he spoke to Stone and Kuznick, and they saw his movie. And Stone and Kuznick said to him, to Cyrus — you know, your film is very dangerous, because it would have the effect of turning the American people against radical Islam.


And he then said to them — what, you’re not against the stoning of women? He said — well, that’s their culture, and who are we to oppose it?

Now, that’s the people we’re dealing with. If we don’t fight this, and develop films like Cyrus’s movie — why can’t we develop a counter-series about the history of the United States to sell to HBO or Showtime that tells that truth about our past, rather than the kind of stuff they’re showing now?

And Howard Zinn was on Fox with his special before he died. Now we have Stone. This could not have happened years ago. These guys would never have got contracts for major television time. And this is a crisis that this has been received well. Look at the rave review it got in the Washington Post. This says something about our culture. It’s a dangerous time, and we have to oppose it.

Thank you.

Keep reading, it's a very long article.

Sunday, 10 March 2013

Poll: US Catholics Greatly Admire Benedict XVI

A poll just published reveals that American Catholics recognize the Holy Father Benedict XVI's positive impact on the Church, the world and their personal lives.

I am very happy that US Catholics do not believe all the media lies about the Catholic Church and the Pope, and that this marginalized, besieged, bashed and discriminated group, whose symbols are constantly degraded and ideas slandered and vilified - as opposed to fairly discussed - maintains a fighting spirit.

From Zenit:
Just a week after Benedict XVI's resignation, a new Knights of Columbus-Marist poll finds that American Catholics give high marks to the Pope Emeritus.

More than three quarters of Catholics (77%) and more than 8 in 10 practicing Catholics (82%) have a very positive or positive impression of Pope Benedict XVI’s years as pope.

American Catholics have very positive views on Pope Benedict’s impact on their lives, the direction of the Church, and the moral direction of the world.

Nearly 7 in 10 Catholics (68 percent) and more than three quarters of practicing Catholics (77 percent) say Pope Benedict had a “very positive” or “positive” impact on their lives. Only 13% of Catholics and 12% of practicing Catholics saw a negative impact.

Additionally, 70 percent of Catholics and 75 percent of practicing Catholics believe he had a “very positive” or “positive” impact on the direction of the Catholic Church. Only about two in 10 said his impact was negative or very negative (21 percent and 19 percent respectively).

About two thirds of Catholics (65 percent) and about 7 in 10 practicing Catholics (69 percent) said he had a “very positive” or “positive” impact on the moral direction of the world. Fewer than a quarter (23 and 22 percent respectively) disagreed and saw his impact as negative or very negative.

Pope Benedict’s use of Twitter was also very popular among Catholics. Two-thirds of Catholics and practicing Catholics (67 percent and 66 percent respectively), said they “liked the idea” of the pope using Twitter to communicate. Only a quarter of each group disagreed (25 percent for Catholics and practicing Catholics).

Overall, nearly 7 in 10 Catholics (69 percent) and three quarters of practicing Catholics (75 percent) have a very favorable or favorable view of Pope Benedict XVI. By contrast, only 16 percent of Catholics (and 14 percent of practicing Catholics) have an unfavorable view.

“The data indicates clearly that American Catholics have a deep respect for Pope Benedict XVI and a great appreciation for his pontificate,” said Knights of Columbus Supreme Knight Carl Anderson. “That so many felt he had a positive impact on their lives, their Church and their world speaks volumes to the good that he was able to do as pope.”

The findings come just days after the Cardinals – gathered in Rome to elect the new pope – sent the Pope Emeritus a note of gratitude for his Petrine ministry and “example of generous pastoral care for the good of the Church and of the world."

The national survey of 2,000 American adults including 515 Catholics was conducted from March 2 through 5. The margin of error for Catholics is +/- 4.3 percentage points.

Saturday, 9 March 2013

Sign the Petition to Nominate Ugandan Pastor Umar Mulinde for the Nobel Peace Prize

Uganda's Pastor Umar Mulinde had the incredible courage to convert from Islam to Christianity, and even to become a Christian minister, well knowing the mortal risk he was taking.

Islam prescribes the death penalty for apostates, those who leave Islam.

This is how Islam has conquered peoples and maintained its position: through the sword, waging war against infidels and beheading apostates.

If there were no death penalty for apostasy, there would be no Islam. This is what cleric and prominent leader of the (now the West's ally) Muslim Brotherhood Yusuf al-Qaradawi says, on video: "If they left apostasy (rida) alone, there wouldn’t have been any Islam. Islam would have been finished right after the death of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)".
Muslims in Uganda, who represent only 13 percent of the population, are agitating for Shariah law to be established in Uganda. Mulinde and his supporters worry that such an action will result in the oppression of women and non-Muslims in Uganda, just as it has in Nigeria.

In his campaign to prevent the introduction of Sharia into Uganda, Pastor Umar helped organize a petition that received more than 36,000 signatures. Mulinde is also a potent supporter of Israel. He filled a stadium with 5,000 supporters of Israel a few years back.

These actions did not go unnoticed by the Islamists in Uganda. On Dec. 24, 2011, a group of radical Muslims threw acid on his face and back in an attempt to kill him. The attack left him alive, but horribly disfigured. Upon learning that he survived the attack, his attackers and their supporters sent letters to his church stating that they wish the attack had resulted in his death.

The acid attack was not the first attempt on Mulinde’s life that he’s miraculously survived. He’s been shot at and poisoned...

The ideology that motivated the acid attack he endured on Christmas Eve in 2011 is the same used to justify suicide attacks against Israel during the Second Intifada and the rocket attacks that took place over the past few days. Christians in Uganda are starting to wake up to the fact that many in the West have failed to understand the threat presented by Islamic imperialism.

“What the West is denying they will realize when it has come upon them,” he said.
If somebody deserves a Nobel Peace Prize, it is Pastor Umar Mulinde. Giving it to Barack Hussein Obama has made a mockery of this honour; let us re-establish its true value.

As over 700 people so far, including me, have done, please sign the petition to Nominate Umar Mulinde for the Nobel Peace Prize here.

Friday, 8 March 2013

Melanie Phillips Accepted Media Lies on the Catholic Church

I was very disappointed with Melanie Phillips on the BBC's Question Time the other night (see video above).

Her answer to the question - interestingly coming from a supposed woman with the voice of a man, a man pretending to be a woman hypocritically pointing the finger at the Catholic Church's alleged behaviour of preaching something and doing something else, a bit like a man trying to pass for a woman I suppose - about Scottish Cardinal Keith O'Brien who recently apologized for "sexual conduct" unbefitting a priest and said that he would play no further role in the public life of the Catholic Church.

The so-called Church abuse scandal is a subject which is not within Phillips' expertise. There is nothing about it in her latest book The World Turned Upside Down (Amazon USA), (Amazon UK) , which covers topics of religion, morality and the modern world, of which this issue has recently been a relevant part.

I suppose Melanie Phillips does not write on things she does not know anything, or enough, about. But on Question Time she did not have the luxury of choice. She was put on the spot and she had to give a reply.

But I think that a better answer would have been to profess her ignorance of the subject.

Instead, her ignorance was revealed by the fact that she repeated the media's favourite inanity about the Catholic Church's celibacy being a contributing factor to the problem.

As far back as 2003, lesbian and former feminist activist Tammy Bruce, in her book The Death of Right and Wrong (Amazon USA), (Amazon UK) , condemned the hypocrisy of her ex-colleagues in the feminist movement, who were accusing the Church of being the cause of paedophile behaviour in its clergymen by not permitting them to marry.

Many of these feminists had been working in rape cases, Bruce said, so they knew very well that sexual abstinence is hardly ever a factor in sex crimes.

The typical profile of the sex offender of any kind is a man who is married or has a girlfriend.

The old-fashioned, Freudian view that there is a libido which must find its outlet is discredited. Psychoanalysis is a false, rejected theory. Freudian concepts like "sublimation" are not accepted any more and I was surprised to hear Phillips using it.

If celibacy were indeed a contributing factor, we would see a lower incidence of these sex abuses among other religions' or Christian denominations' clergy who are not bound to celibacy.

But this, despite the media's almost exclusive attention on, not to say obsession with, the Catholic Church's problems with this issue - obsession that included reporting these events on front pages much, much more often than the new developments warranted -, is not the case.

The rates of sexual abuse within the Roman Catholic Church were in the past the same or even lower than those in other Christian churches, in other religions and in other institutions like schools and children’s homes, as shown by a U.S. Department of Education's extensive study. Now, due to the fact the the Catholic Church is the only one who confronted and effectively dealt with this issue, those rates are much lower.

So, the celibacy causal theory is empirically disproved by the evidence.

Tammy Bruce wrote:
In the world as defined by the leaders of the Left Elite:
... Taking vows, claiming to represent God, and then molesting adolescent boys is the fault of “the Church,” not of the reprehensible gay men who betray their vows, their church, and their community.
This is in clear letters, by a woman who is herself homosexual, exactly the point of the whole "Catholic Church sex abuse": the perpetrators were not acting like Catholic priests, they were acting like homosexuals.

The whole debate over this has been turned upside down not to offend homosexual sensitivities. Nobody cares about Catholic sensitivies, so that was fine.

Reality has been turned outside down, and it is odd how Melanie Phillips' latest book not only has the title "The World Turned Upside Down", but also deals with the many cases in which the Leftist ideology which dominates the West overturns reality, exactly like in this case concerning the Church.

What shocked me was how Phillips passively believed and repeated all the nonsense peddled by the media on this subject.

After having denounced media reporting on Israel and its conflict with the Palestinians which grossly distorts reality, Phillips more than anyone should know from first-hand experience (being a Jew with a passion for Israel) that the media portraying of highly politically sensitive issues cannot be trusted.

The mainstream media are politically overwhelmingly on the Left and, in the way they are prejudiced against Israel, they are also, and even more, prejudiced against the Catholic Church.

How could she have missed that? I believe that, if someone, in repeating the media distortions and even outright lies, had treated Israel as badly as she did the Catholic Church the other night, she would have accused this someone of Jew-hatred and anti-Semitism.

Eastleigh By-Election: 55% Voted for Anti-Gay-Marriage Candidates

The results of the Eastleigh by-election in Southern England have been remarkable in many respects.

Not only the right-wing UK Independence Party triumphed with the best performance in a British Parliament election in all its history, coming a close second to the winners of what was for them a safe seat, the Liberal Democrats, and pushing the not-so-conservative Conservative Party into third place.

But also, 55% of all votes went to candidates who oppose same-sex marriage:
Most Eastleigh voters backed pro-marriage candidates

The Eastleigh by-election was one of the most significant for years, and 55% of all votes cast went to candidates who think marriage should remain as it is.

Numerous people have been blaming the Conservative Party’s third place behind the Lib Dems and UKIP on David Cameron’s push to redefine marriage.

Thursday, 7 March 2013

Sign the Petition to the UN for the Recognition of a World Day against Christianophobia

Christians are today by far the most persecuted religious group. The number of Christians killed each year for their faith is so high that it calculates to one Christian martyr's life being taken every five minutes.

This must be stopped. The UN would let down its mission if it did not do what is in its power to stop this abominable form of discrimination and this genocide.

The 2nd of March 2011 is the day when Muslim extremists in Pakistan assassinated Shahbaz Bhatti, the Roman Catholic man who was Pakistan's first Minister for Minorities Affairs.

They killed him for his work to abolish the country's blasphemy law which has been used to persecute Christians and other faith minorities.

March 2nd has now been proposed as the Annual World Day against Christianophobia, with a petition to the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon for the recognition of a World Day against “Christianophobia”.

At this moment 2272 have already signed it, including me.

You can sign it here:

Let’s promote March 2nd as the Annual World Day against Christianophobia!

This is the petition:
Dear Secretary General!

Present-day persecution of Christians attracted world attention after the cold-blooded killing of 58 worshippers by radical Islamist gunmen inside Our Lady of Salvation Syriac Catholic Cathedral in Baghdad (Iraq), in October 2010, and the bombing during a New Year’s Eve service of the coptic al-Qiddissin Church, in Alexandria (Egypt), leaving 23 people dead and another 97 injured.

Perhaps even more worrying was the March 2nd murder of Mr. Shahbaz Bhatti, Pakistan’s Federal Minister of Minorities in broad daylight in Islamabad, since he was martyred precisely for his opposition to the «blasphemy laws» which are used as a legal instrument to persecute non-Muslims.

Direct killing, however, is not the only form of “christianophobia.” Current persecution of Christians also includes vandalism against churches and discrimination and harassment of individuals, particularly in the West, under the form of unjust representation in the media, unfair treatment by employers, disrespect for the right to conscientious objection, disregard for the right of parents to be the primary educators of their children, etc…

This reality makes the recognition of a World Day Against Christianophobia urgent – to draw the attention of public opinion, social movements, policy makers and the media to this crucial issue and to provide a unique annual opportunity for Christians to defend their rights in society.

A World Day against Christianophobia is the natural next step after recent positive attitudes adopted by the European Parliament, such as its resolutions expressing deep concern over the attacks against Christian communities in Iraq (Nov 25th, 2010), and its condemnation of attacks against Christians in Egypt, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Iran and Iraq, as well as the forcible interruption by the Turkish authorities of the Christmas Mass in northern Cyprus (Jan 20th, 2011).

However, words – even if they are pronounced from the floor of a Parliament – are not enough ! No concrete results will come from them if the persecution against Christians is not recognised as the first worldwide emergency with regard to religious discrimination and violence.
Sign the petition here!

London Protest: Christians Persecuted in Pakistan Demand Equality

Saturday 2nd March I attended in London the protest against discrimination and persecution of Pakistani Christians.

Organized by the British Pakistani Christian Association, it included the presentation of a petition both to London's Pakistani Embassy and to the British Prime Minister's residence in 10 Downing Street. Several religious figures and human rights campaigners were speakers at the demonstration.

A Peace Rally and Memorial Concert in Trafalgar Square followed, in memory of Shahbaz Bhatti, the Roman Catholic man who was Pakistan's first Minister for Minorities Affairs from 2008 until Muslim extremists assassinated him in 2011 for his work to abolish the country's blasphemy law which has been used to persecute faith minorities. He was the only Christian in the government.

Minister Bhatti had received repeated death threats for his consistent defence of the rights of Pakistan's religious minorities and for his fight for the abolition of Pakistan’s shameful blasphemy laws, which mandate the death sentence for anyone thought to have spoken ill of Muhammad or to have in any way offended Muslim sensitivities: the standard of accepted evidence is very low, and intent or lack of it is not a consideration in passing the sentence.

Two months before the assassination of Bhatti, another man campaigning for the same cause, Provincial Governor Salman Taseer, had been killed by his own bodyguard, who for his crime was welcomed as a hero by many Pakistani Muslims.

Saturday's event, like a similar one in 2012, commemorated the anniversary of Shahbaz Bhatti's assassination on 2 March 2011 outside his home in Islamabad.

Constantly Pakistani Christians are killed for their faith, or other atrocities are committed against them, like the rape of a Christian 2-year-old girl because her father refused to convert to Islam.

The situation of Christians in Pakistan is dire. Recently a Christian 19-year-old boy, Mard-e-Khuda, living in the Bahawalpur district, was barbarically killed on the false accusation of having an affair with a Muslim girl.

"20 million Christians in Pakistan are treated as second class citizens and denied justice in Pakistan by Islamic governments which never feel ashamed to release Muslim criminals and terrorists" said Dr. Nazir S Bhatti, who has been been campaigning for equal rights for Christian people in Pakistan since 1985 and is President of the Pakistan Christian Congress (PCC). He had to flee Pakistan for his safety and now lives in the USA.

While in his country Nazir Bhatti was arrested many times. The government of Pakistan registered 21 false cases of treason and blasphemy against him on February 13 1998, for leading a protest against the burning of the Christian village Shanti Nagar in Punjab by radical Muslims.

The reality of Christian victimization and persecution in this Muslim-majority country is so horrific that I suggested that the international community, particularly the British Commonwealth of which it is part, should give Pakistan the South African treatment and treat it like a pariah until it repeals its blasphemy laws and protects its religious minorities.

As usual, last Christmas was a dark Christmas for Pakistani Christians, and, amid growing fear of persecution and rampant economic and social discrimination in Pakistan, the year 2012 was one of the worst years for them.

Raymond Ibrahim, in his monthly report of Muslim Persecution of Christians throughout the world for December, writes about Pakistan:
Birgitta Almby, a 70-year-old Bible school teacher from Sweden, was shot by two men in front of her home; she died soon after. She had served in Pakistan for 38 years. Police said they could not find the assassins and could not unearth a motive, although Christians close to her have no doubt "Islamic extremists" murdered the elderly woman: "Who else would want to murder someone as apolitical and harmless as Almby, who had dedicated her life to serving humanity?" That service may have included sharing the Gospel with Muslims, an act strictly forbidden in Islam.
Other recent Muslim atrocities against Christians are listed on Jihad Watch.

The list of horrors could continue, but I'm sure that those who do not want to look away and pretend it does not happen have now got the message.

On a positive note, March 2nd has now been proposed as the Annual World Day against Christianophobia, with a petition to the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon for the recognition of a World Day against “Christianophobia”.

I would have probably preferred "against the persecution of Christians" to another "phobia", but it is true that the latter includes other forms of attack against Christianity, like the ones coming from the Western "progressives" as well as from communist regimes or the 1,400-year-old cult of Islam.

Wednesday, 6 March 2013

Female Genital Mutilation Is an Islamic Practice

Another macroscopic, gigantic example of media cover-up regarding the reality of Islam.

The London Evening Standard yesterday carried an article, London’s challenge to stop girls’ mutilation, in which it managed never to mention the words "Islam" or "Muslim" once in the entire piece while discussing FGM, female genital mutilation, the removal of part or all of the external female genitalia (vulva) to prevent sexual pleasure.

The dhimmi newspaper Independent (from reason and reality), which in past articles by Robert Fisk, a journalist personally recommended by Osama Bin Laden as a messenger of al Qaeda's propaganda, has shamefully demonized the Egyptian and Syrian Christians for not supporting the Islamist "revolutions" which for them spell persecution, has gone even further.

For this British rag's columnist Sadaf Qureshi, FGM, far from having an Islamic dimension, does not even have a cultural one: to believe it has, one can safely assume, she would probably consider a sign of racism.

For her "Female genital mutilation (FGM) isn’t just something that’s carried out in the deepest, darkest recesses of the globe. It's a UK problem too." I wonder in what mysterious ways it became a UK problem.

The most interesting part of that article is outside the article, in this illuminating comment:
Of the 31 countries with a proportion of Muslims greater than 90% of their population, the following 15 appear on the list of countries where FGM is prevalent. Afghanistan Iran Mauritania Yemen Tajikistan Iraq Turkey Somalia Niger Comoros Algeria Palestinian territories Saudi Arabia Djibouti Libya Pakistan Senegal Gambia Egypt Syria Bangladesh. Of the next 12 with between 70% and 80%, a further 8 are on the FGM list: Bangladesh Indonesia Oman Guinea Qatar United Arab Emirates Sierra Leone Sudan. There are only 53 countries on the FGM list.
That the practice of FGM pre-dates Islam is true but irrelevant. Islam has perpetuated and continues to perpetuate through its teachings this savagery, that Christianity never ever condoned. In fact, in many African countries like Kenya and Tanzania Christians are actively campaigning against it.

The mutilations carried out in London today do not have a "cultural" origin, as the Standard falsely says, but an Islamic one, brought as they have been into this city which did not know them before by Muslim immigrants, now settled here in great and increasing numbers.

As Jamie Glazov points out:
Naturally Muslims are not the only ones who perpetrate FGM. Of course, FGM is practised outside of Islam, including under non-Islamic African tribal cultures. I never said anywhere that FGM is only practised by Muslims. But the key issue here is that Muslims are the principle religious group that practices this sexual violence against women. And the reality is that if you are a victim of FGM, then the chances are very high that you live in a Muslim household and in a Muslim culture.

Now within the context of Islamic FGM, the barbarity is kept alive and legitimized by Islamic theology. This is the case in Egypt, where this crime against girls is waged on a massive level. The Egyptian government banned FGM in 1996, but an Egyptian court overturned the ban in July 1997 because of the ferocious uprising of the Islamic clerics, who fervently pointed to Islamic teachings to re-implement this war against women’s sexuality. The Muslim mutilators pointed to traditional Islamic teachings that sanction FGM, which include the Prophet Muhammad’s instruction that circumcising girls is “a preservation of honor for women.” Also, a legal manual of the Shafi’i school of Islamic jurisprudence, ‘Umdat al-Salik, which is endorsed by Al-Azhar University of Cairo — the oldest and most prestigious university in the Islamic world — states that circumcision is obligatory for both boys and girls.
Here is the whole quotation from the text mentioned by Glazov, The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ‘Umdat al-Salik by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri:
Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female) by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male, but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the clitoris (this is called HufaaD).
Recently, the largest Muslim organization of Indonesia, the country with the largest Muslim population in the world, defended FGM as a "human right".

Nonie Darwish's book about Sharia law Cruel and Usual Punishment (Amazon USA) , (Amazon UK) says:
In Indonesia, the practice had previously been unknown before Shafi'i Islam was introduced into South-East Asia. The claim that female circumcision is not a religious practice doesn't hold up.

While many say there is nothing in Islam requiring female circumcision, one of Sunni Islam's 'Four Great Imams', Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (from whom the Hanbali school of Islamic jurisprudence takes its name) quotes Mohammed as saying, "Circumcision is a law for men and a preservation of honour for women".
The practice of FGM, moreover, is perfectly aligned to the whole message of Islam with its subjugation of women. So, linking the two has a much deeper significance than associating, for example, as the media disproportionately and misleadingy do, Catholic priesthood and homosexuality or paedophilia, as both of the latter are antinomic to Catholic teachings.

It is abominable that Islamic apologists and their leftist allies continue to try to exculpate Islam with assertions like: Muhammed was not a paedophile because in those days it was ordinary practice to marry prepubescent girls, or: FGM is not Islam's fault because it is "cultural". And all this nonsense is daily repeated by the media: no wonder the resistance against Islamization makes such a slow progress in Europe.

Tuesday, 5 March 2013

UK: Indoctrinate Them When They Are 3-years-old

In the highly politically correct UK, school children as young as 3 have been branded "homophobic" or "racist".

In 2010, an astonishing 100 primary school pupils a day on average were reported to local authorities for such "offences" as calling each other “gaylord”, "gay", "lesbian", or saying: “This work’s gay”.

A survey in England and Wales concluded that more than 20,000 nursery and primary school children, aged 3-11, were racist or homophobic.

It is basically a mini totalitarian education system, in which toddlers and children are put on record, registered on a government database, and their future careers potentially damaged, for so-called "hate crimes".

These reports, which include the child's name, a description of the incident and the punishment, can be used by the police and social services, and can remain on a child’s record into secondary school or even into later life, effectively labelling the child.
And if schools are asked for a pupil reference by a future employer or a university, the record could be used as the basis for it, meaning the pettiest of incidents has the potential to blight a child for life...

Heads who send in ‘nil’ returns are criticised for ‘under-reporting’.
Between 2002 and 2009, 280,000 incidents were reported.

"The policy is no longer being carried out after the coalition government changed guidance to allow schools to use their own judgment."

This is one of the many abominations for which we have to thank the Macpherson inquiry, ordered by Labour, to look into the police failure to apprehend those who in 1993 killed black teenager Stephen Lawrence in South London.

In 1999 the inquiry concluded that the Metropolitan Police investigation had been deeply flawed and that the police were guilty of “institutional racism”. The Macpherson Report contained pearls like this: "A racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person", opening the door to any abuse of the term.

In addition, it called for “education and example at the youngest age, and an overall attitude of ‘zero-tolerance’” to free society of racist attitudes.

So, British schools were required by the Labour government's Department for Education and Skills to investigate, log and report every alleged racist incident in the playground, even among very young children, and figures started to be compiled from 2002. Since, by Macpherson diktat, "racism" in the United Kingdom now means anything "perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person", it's not surprising that the number of these incidents have snowballed. And, for good measure, other forms of political incorrectness, like "homophobia", have been thrown in.

The Department for Education said in 2006 that school staff must always “explore” the “possibility of a racist dimension” to an incident, because the Macpherson Report claimed that there could be “unwitting or unintentional racism”. Jokes, graffiti, comments made in classroom discussions: all was fair game. Anyone could report these incidents, even if the alleged victim was not offended.

Monday, 4 March 2013

France Will Be 40 Percent Muslim in 2030

The quotation below is liberally translated from the French from Muslim Immigration to France. You Won't Be Able to Say You didn't Know.

I didn't write it, only translated it, so I cannot provide sources for the data or indeed how they have been arrived at.

Although it's true that France is prohibited by law from collecting official statistics about its citizens' race or religion, it's possible to make estimates based on studies calculating the number of people in France originating from Muslim-majority countries.

Nevertheless, I think that the precise figures should be of less concern than what will become of France and indeed what is already happening there. There is no doubt that France is becoming progressively Islamised, and Muslims only need to be a 10-20 percent of a country's population (even less) to try to turn it into a sharia state, as it's evident by just looking at a map of the world.

Does this piece want to alarm people? Yes, it does.
In 1968 the French population was 49.7 million people. Muslims in France were 610,000 or 1.23% of the population.

In 1988 the French population was 56 million. Muslims in France were 2,000,000 or 3.6% of the population.

In 2009 the French population was 67 million. Muslims in France were 8,000,000 or 11.94%.

These are official figures, which are likely to underestimate the real number of Muslims.

France's Muslim population has been multiplying by at least 3.5 every 20 years since 1968.

If this growth is not stopped or reversed, in 2030 the French population is projected to be 70 million people, of whom 28 million will be Muslim, or 40% of the French population.

Therefore, at the current rate of immigration, in just 17 years nearly one in two people living in France will be Muslim. This is shocking for a country that has no Islamic tradition and had no Arab population as late as 1930.

So what will the situation in France look like 20 years from now, since Islam is a conquering religion that rejects any coexistence with other religions?