Nationalism or Patriotism?

Is nationalism a good thing or a bad thing?

Some people say that nationalism is bad, whereas patriotism is good.

In the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, "patriotism" is defined as love for one's country or devotion for it, even to the point of sacrifice. It seems that there is no excess of patriotism in this sense, as it's always positive.

The Merriam-Webster gives this example of use of the term: "You may not agree with him politically, but no one can question his patriotism."

The two examples offered by the same source for "nationalism", on the other hand, are: "The war was caused by nationalism and greed." and "Nazism's almost epic nationalism appealed to downtrodden Germans still suffering the humiliation of being defeated in World War I." Not very nice.

This belligerence associated with nationalism is reflected in the Merriam-Webster's definition of the word, with loyalty to and pride for one's country replacing patriotism's more benevolent connotations of love and devotion. The belief that one's homeland is better and more important than other countries also forms part of the definition, as well as placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups, and a desire to be a separate and independent country.

The motto "My country, right or wrong" should probably sound nationalist, not patriotic, according to these definitions.

Wikiquote would generally agree:

This page is for quotes about Patriotism, which is a term denoting a devotion to fundamental fellowship with other human beings united in common causes, usually related to identified geographic regions or those within particular political associations and boundaries. Frequently compared or contrasted with ideas of nationalism, which are often, but not always, designated as less noble manifestations of similar distinguishing impulses with a greater accommodation of bigotry.

The Oxford Dictionary is more nuanced in its distinction, though. It provides this definition and example for "patriotism":

[V]igorous support for one’s country: ‘a highly decorated officer of unquestionable integrity and patriotism’

and for "nationalism":

Patriotic feeling, principles, or efforts: ‘an early consciousness of nationalism and pride’. An extreme form of patriotism marked by a feeling of superiority over other countries: ‘playing with right-wing nationalism’. Advocacy of political independence for a particular country: ‘Scottish nationalism’.

So, not all nationalism is bad, it implies, only its extreme manifestations.

"Liberals" (a misnomer) can be blamed for many things but not for having too clear ideas. Notoriously Leftist Wikipedia says:

Nationalism is a belief, creed or political ideology that involves an individual identifying with, or becoming attached to, one's nation. Nationalism involves national identity, by contrast with the related construct of patriotism, which involves the social conditioning and personal behaviors that support a state's decisions and actions.

What? Maybe the second sentence's utter confusion explains why at the moment the Wikipedia entry page on patriotism is empty, and the relative Talk page reveals a political-ideological row among its editors that I have no desire to follow in this little semantic tour of mine.

Other sources use "nationalism" and "patriotism" almost interchangeably and think that both can be excessive.

What conclusion to draw from all this? I think that nationalism, as well as patriotism, can be a force for the good. Human beings, like all social animals, need to be part of a group, to "belong", and recognising one's membership of a circle of people inherently has a divisive element. If there is an "us", there must be a "them".

There is nothing wrong in this. Not only is it natural, it is also beneficial in establishing ties and communities and in the organisation of human societies. A world government is only desidered by totalitarians like people who adhere to Islamic law and communists.

To blame nations for wars and national supremacism is like, as Richard Dawkins and his fellow self-alleged - there is no element of novelty in their ideas - "new" atheists do, to blame religions for wars: absurd.

As a zoologist, Dawkins should know that many social animals including human beings, especially the younger males of the species, will fight other groups or individuals. Humans just find more inventive excuses to do so. If you abolish nationhood or religious affiliation, they will make up something else. They've already done so: now that these groupings are less strong than before, they've created more artificial ones, like football teams, as a cause to battle for, sometimes even violently.

My conclusion is simple. Words don't have a magical power. Some semantic disputes are useful to clarify issues while others are pointless. This particular one seems a borderline case to me. But, for purely pragmatic reasons, given a choice, I would opt for the term "patriotism", as it usually - albeit not necessarily - denotes a more benign feeling and less aggressive idea than "nationalism".

Religions Are Not the Same, Not even Monotheistic Religions

The often heard view that all religions are the same or, at least, the monotheistic or so-called Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism and Islam) are very similar is an extremely fallacious view, with potentially deleterious consequences due to the confusion it generates.

This is another myth of our age. The belief in God is too generic to form a common basis. The Christian God is not the Muslim God, and I'm referring to the concepts of God.

To say that all religions are the same (they all involve a belief in God) is equivalent to saying that all physical theories are the same (they all deal with time and space).

A concept takes its meaning from the theory of which it is part.

So, for example, Newtonian time and space are different from Einsteinian time and space. When a new physical theory (relativity) is developed, it redefines the concepts of the old theory (classical mechanics) in a way which may completely transform and revolutionize them.

So is the same for the concept of God in different religious doctrines.

To Be "Liberal" Means...

To be "liberal" means to say BCE (Before the Common Era) for BC (Before Christ), and never to call the Pope "Holy Father", but to call "Holy city (or town)" every place that Muslims call that way.

Another small detail is to write “the Prophet” Muhammad with a capital P but to write “the pope” with a small p.

Nazism Paved the Way

First published on American Thinker.

By Enza Ferreri



Of all the myriad myths spread at light speed by the enemies of Christianity and astonishingly believed without much critical thought by vast numbers of people, one of the most surreal must be the idea that Nazism was Christian.

This is part of an email I received from Tony, a supporter of my party Liberty GB, who sent me a long list of sharp attacks against Christianity after watching my video What Is Uniquely Good about Western Civilisation Derives from Christianity:

For example Adolf Hitler was a Catholic and included proclamations of his beliefs in his writings, e.g. "We demand liberty for all religious denominations in the State, so far as they are not a danger to it and do not militate against the morality and moral sense of the German race. The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any particular confession." There are many more religious quotes from Hitler here: http://www.nobeliefs.com/speeches.htm

What is totally missed by Tony and, unfortunately, many others is that “positive Christianity” is not Christianity at all, but a way of “restoring the old pagan Nordic values and ‘substitute the spirit of the hero for that of the Crucifixion’.”

Another thing that anti-Christians don’t consider: in Nazi times Germans were overwhelmingly Christian - even despite Nazism’s comprehensive attempts to erase Christianity from Germany and replace it with a neo-pagan religion based on pre-Christian Germanic legends -, and so Hitler had to pay some lip service in public to Christianity. But both what he and the Nazis in power did and what he said in private and is recorded tell another story, much closer to the truth.

Hitler said, as reported in Hitler's Table Talk 1941-1944: His Private Conversations (Amazon USA) (Amazon UK) :

Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things...

The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity... Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity... And that's why someday its structure will collapse... The only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little...

Christianity is an invention of sick brains...

I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie. Our epoch in the next 200 years will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity.

Very modern, with references to the theory of evolution – in which the Fuhrer was an ardent believer – and the scientific “understanding of the universe” replacing Christianity.

According to the book Heresy: Ten Lies They Spread About Christianity (Amazon USA) (Amazon UK) by Michael Coren, a program listing the main dogmas of the National Reich Church - a Nazi institution intended to eliminate Christianity from Germany and establishing a new pagan religion -, published in 1942 by The New York Times, ended with:

On the day of the foundation of the National Reich Church the Christian cross shall be removed from all churches, cathedrals, and chapels inside the frontiers of the Reich and its colonies and will be replaced by the symbol of invincible Germany - the swastika.

Another lie dear to the Left that has managed to enter the collective mind is that the Popes wanted to get rid of the Jews. Countless rabbis, Jewish leaders and Israeli authorities have recognised the crucial role played by the Catholic Church in helping the Jews. In fact the Church has done more than any other institution to help and rescue Jews from Nazism.

From the Jewish Library website:

The vindication of Pius XII has been established principally by Jewish writers and from Israeli archives. It is now established that the Pope supervised a rescue network which saved 860,000 Jewish lives - more than all the international agencies put together.

The power of propaganda and how easy it is to smear a political or ideological opponent is terrifying.

The danger of a return to values and ideas espoused by the Nazis, that we hear so much about, is real, but doesn’t come so much from the direction of the usual suspects, “Islamophobic”, neo-Nazi groups, as from a far more mainstream, Leftist direction.

The threat has two sources. One is the rise of Islam in the West – aided and abetted by the Left - with its well-known ideological and historical links to Nazism and anti-Semitism. The second source is less well-known. Recent in-depth and ground-breaking historical research, thanks to the opening of national archives - previously closed to the public - after the Fall of the Berlin Wall, has thrown an entirely new light on what nurtured Nazi ideology. We already knew that Hitler and Nazism were neo-pagan and anti-Christian (despite what the Left says), but books like Karla Poewe's New Religions and the Nazis (Amazon USA) (Amazon UK), Gene Edward Veith’s Modern Fascism: Liquidating the Judaeo-Christian Worldview (Amazon USA) (Amazon UK) and others, go much further than that.

They reveal a worrisome, sinister similarity between Nazism and current trends, both sharing hostility for the Judaeo-Christian tradition and its ethics and increasingly embracing neo-pagan views. In many way, Nazis were pioneers of what’s happening today. About Nazis, Poewe says:

They also rejected Christian morality. They couldn't stand the Ten Commandments. They were totally against any categorical or timeless morality. They wanted something opportunistic, something that changed with the human circumstances.

These days’ moral relativism in a nutshell.

US historian Veith has a definition for fascism that is undistinguishable from our time’s prevailing ethos: “Fascism is the modern world's nostalgia for paganism. It is a sophisticated culture's revolt against God.”

As the 10 years of historical research by Karla Poewe document, Nazism was ushered in by new religions, chiefly the German Faith Movement (Deutsche Glaubensbewegung or DGB), mixing pagan Nordic and Hindu religions.

Mirroring present-day's environmentalism and its pantheism were Himmler's proclamations of the sacred status of German lands. SS symbols, oaths and rituals were derived from ancient German and Nordic mythology. The rooms of their secret meetings were decorated with runes, prehistoric signs supposed to give the power of prophecy to anyone who could read them.

Himmler and Hitler wanted to abolish the "criminal institution of the Christian Church known as marriage", although gave up this goal as unacceptable to contemporary Germans. They’d be delighted to see how much their ideas are being vindicated nowadays.

There was a "secular christening" for illegitimate children, called "SS name-giving", created by Himmler, complete with swastikas and runes.

About homosexuality, Poewe said:

Hauer's DGB bunde shared with National Socialism a tendency toward homoerotism. Hauer himself was permissibly heterosexual, but "homosexuality was very tolerated in these youth movements, and a high percentage of the SA and SS were homosexual or bisexual. People like to think that because Adolf Hitler murdered (SA leader) Ernst Rohm, who was homosexual, he was repressive of homosexuality. But that wasn't the case. It's a myth to think the Nazi movement was against homosexuality. Far from it; it wasn't sexually repressive at all.

So, here we have it: the Nazis paved the way, and now we can follow in their futuristic, progressive path: marriages are in decline, Christianity is dying, illegitimacy is on the rise, paganism seems the way forward, and homosexuality is making great advances towards normal status.


Photo by Marion Doss (Creative Commons CC BY-SA 2.0).

Europe Equates Communism with Nazism

Something good is coming out of Europe.

On 6 February the European Union has called on Saudi Arabia to allow public worship for all faiths:

[T]he European Parliament said that while Saudi Arabia was an important strategic partner, Saudi authorities should accept that it is a human right for individuals to worship any religion in public.

Issues like terrorism, Israeli-Palestinian peace, the Syrian conflict, post-Arab-Spring transition, and better relations with Iran, were all key areas in which the EU said Saudi co-operation was needed.

However, it made clear that if this partnership "is to be effective, [Saudi Arabia] must respect basic human rights and civil liberties".

MEPs demanded that the Saudi state show "respect the public worship of any faith and to foster moderation and tolerance of religious diversity".

Saudi Arabia has a poor track record on religious freedom. In February 2013, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdulaziz ibn Abdullah Al al-Sheikh said it is "necessary to destroy all the churches in the Arabian Peninsula".

Article 23 of Saudi Arabia's constitution says: "The state protects Islam; it implements its Sharia; it orders people to do right and shun evil; it fulfils the duty regarding God's call."

While private practice of non-Islamic beliefs is protected by law, public practice is prohibited and this prohibition is enforced by the Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, otherwise known as 'mutawa' or religious police.

However, the line between public and private worship is unclear. In December 2011 a group of Ethiopian Christians were arrested for "illicit mingling" when they met together to pray during Advent.

Mutawa officers patrol the streets enforcing laws such as the strict prohibition of Bibles brought to convert locals, or any form of public worship of a religion other than Islam.

According to the US State Department's Office for International Religious Freedom, Saudi Arabia continues to impose a blanket ban on all foreign non-Islamic clergy entering the country for purposes of conducting religious services.

Apostasy - conversion from Islam to another religion - is a crime punishable by death and Saudi Arabia is one of the last countries in the world where public executions still take place.

The feared mutawa also enforce strict segregation of the sexes and the absolute prohibition on the sale or consumption of alcohol.

They are frequently accused of abusing their powers, particularly when it comes to dealing with members of other faiths.

The call from the European Parliament comes two days after mutawa chief Sheikh Abdul Latif al-Sheikh was quoted in the Saudi newspaper, Okaz, as saying that he would "eliminate" religious extremists within his organisations ranks who are "advocates of sedition".

The European Parliament also called for the Saudi Arabian authorities to improve respect for religious diversity "at all levels of the education system and in the public discourse of officials".

Article 13 of the Saudi Constitution says, "Education will aim at instilling the Islamic faith in the younger generation, providing its members with knowledge and skills and preparing them to become useful members in the building of their society, members who love their homeland and are proud of its history."

The mutawa also enforce a ban on women driving, something the European Parliament also protested strongly against in its recent resolution.

"MEPs urge Saudi Arabia to remove all restrictions on women's rights, including freedom of movement, health, education, marriage, employment opportunities, representation in judicial processes, to promote women's participation in the economic, social, cultural and political life," the European Parliament stated.

MEPs called for an end to the male guardianship system that requires all women to have some form of male legal guardian, usually a father, husband or brother.

On other issues, the European Parliament recognised that new rules have stopped money being directly channelled to terrorist organisations, but MEPs called on Saudi authorities to improve control over the funding of radical militant groups by Saudi citizens and charities.

"Saudi Arabia's financial and political support for some religious and political groups in North Africa, the Middle East and Asia may result in reinforcing fundamentalist and obscurantist forces that undermine efforts to nurture democratic governance," the EU said.

"Saudi Arabia should also stop any financial or military support of extremist groups in Syria and contribute to a peaceful and inclusive solution to the conflict there."

The Saudi Interior Ministry estimates 1,200 Saudis have travelled to Syria to fight there since March 2011.

The Parliament also called for an immediate moratorium on the death penalty, as well as better protections for freedom of expression and the press, both on the internet and through other media, saying such freedoms were "essential in a free society".

The resolution also called on Saudi authorities to work to end recent violent attacks against migrant workers, as well as to release the many thousands who have been arrested and are being kept in makeshift centres.

Adopted by 47 votes to 4, the resolution is scheduled to be put to a vote by the European Parliament in full when it meets in Strasbourg in March.

Furthermore, there has been a new landmark ruling.

The " Grand Chamber" of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg has recently ruled about a thorny issue, upholding the total legitimacy of the Polish law that prohibits the use and display of symbols of communist, fascist and Nazi regimes.

The Polish law has been in existence for a few years,

What is really revolutionary in this verdict is not so much its application to fascist and Nazi symbols, which have been considered anathema for a very long time - since the end of the Second World War -, as the fact that it places communism into the same bracket as fascism and Nazism, something that needed to be done.

Radical Feminists’ War on Churches

First published on New English Review.

By Enza Ferreri



The similarity between Muslims on one hand and feminist and homosexual activists on the other may superficially seem shocking, but in fact it is normal, indeed predictable.

Their enemy is the same: the decency and morality deriving from Christian civilisation.

Muslim mobs desecrate and burn churches, they break crosses. And so do feminists, with their LGBT allies.

Last 23-25 November a horde of 7,000 lesbians and pro-abortion feminists tried to storm the Cathedral of San Juan Bautista (John the Baptist) in Argentina, to desecrate and ransack it. Since the church was protected by a human shield of 1,500 young Catholic men, the violent women assaulted them physically and psychologically. The feminists spray-painted "Burn the church" and, prevented from putting that noble intention into practice, burned an effigy of Argentinian-born Pope Francis instead.

On 25 November, to coincide with Putin's visit to the Holy Father, an Italian feminist collective, "Cagne sciolte", broke into the Basilica di San Lorenzo al Verano, in Rome, to express solidarity with the Pussy Riot and protest against Putin, holding a banner containing a sexual expletive in front of the altar.

Femen's sextremists, atheists and feminists - as they call themselves - wrote on their blog:

And let's not forget the role of the church, which interferes with the freedom of women and LGBTQI persons.We are therefore convinced that the Holy Roman Church and the Orthodox Church have points of contact: an agreement between the Patriarchs at the expense of our body is always found. We will not stop and continue the fight until the last pope, the last Tsar and the last king are overthrown.

The last sentence is a homage to the anarchist roots of these deluded people. I actually remember another version of it from my student, anarchist days: "With the guts of the last pope we will hang the last king". LGBTQI stands for "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer or Questioning, and Intersex", as defined by the University of Akron Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Union, but don't think that it will end there: I'm sure that more alphanumeric symbols will be continually added over time.

On 16 December, feminists and lesbians of the "XXX Feminist Collective", masked with hoods recalling those of the Russian anarchists Pussy Riot, invaded the Saint Petronio's Basilica in Bologna, Italy. They held up a banner in front of the sanctuary, reading "You occupy the clinics. We invade the churches", and shouted "Get the Church out of our ovaries".

They protested against the rejection by the European Parliament of the pro-abortion Estrela Report as an official EU Directive. Named after the Portuguese socialist Edite Estrela, the Report wanted to force all the EU member states to legalise the artificial insemination of lesbians, to declare abortion in the EU a "women's right", and to restrict the right of conscientious objection by doctors, medical staff and pharmacists in connection with abortion, contraception and artificial insemination.

Christmas Day is Muslims' favourite time of the year to carry out attacks against Christians in the Middle East, and their Western copycats seem to have the same predisposition. An activist of the feminist group Femen, Josephine Witt, interrupted the Christmas service in the 13th-century High Cathedral of St. Peter, the main cathedral of Cologne, Germany. Naked, she climbed onto the altar, from where she shouted at the congregation, showing the words "I am God" painted on her body (see video above).

The beauty of the Christmas Mass corrupted - if for a few moments - by the beast of deluded madness, the dignity of the clergy contrasted with the search for depravity and perfectioning of squalor.

The same group, Femen, has also profanated the Church of the Madeleine in Paris on December 20 and Notre Dame de Paris before that.

Therefore, when we read that last Christmas vandals decapitated the statues of a nativity scene - including that of Baby Jesus - displayed under a historical arch in the streets of the Italian city of Ancona, we cannot discern if the responsible have been Muslim or LGBT, feminist and other Leftist criminals.

And, if anyone is in any doubt about the importance of these criminal acts, we have Suzanne Moore, columnist of that bastion of neo-Marxist thinking, The Guardian, to remind us, in pure Gramscian terms, that "revolution always begins in culture".

Islam Is the Symptom, Cultural Marxism the Disease

On my Facebook page Save the West, a supporter posted this:

ANALLY RAPED A DYING WOMAN
OR: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE FROM A FAILED CULTURE MASS-MIGRATE TO A VERY CIVILISED CULTURE (WITH ALREADY FOR YEARS TOP SCORES IN THE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORTS)
>>> In Sweden Somali immigrant Abdi Hakim Ali is a prime example of what happens when it does go off. He first raped and sodomized a drunk woman as she slept. Weeks later he anally raped a dying woman who overdosed on drugs. Even after she perished in the midst of his attack. The vermin carried on raping her corpse.

It was followed by the link to the article that prompted his comment, Somali Immigrant Who Anally Raped Dead Body To Be Deported From Sweden.

I shared this post on the Facebook page of my party Liberty GB, with a variation:

ANALLY RAPED A DYING WOMAN
OR: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE FROM A FAILED CULTURE MASS-MIGRATE TO A CIVILISED (BUT WITH A SERIOUS DRINKING AND DRUGS PROBLEM) SOCIETY

We have to realise one thing here: Western societies are always, rightly, contrasted with Islamic ones in terms of civilisation and progress. But we should stop idealising ourselves. If our own societies were not in serious trouble after decades of Leftist ideological rule, we wouldn't have any problems of Islamisation in the first place, because Muslims would not have been allowed to immigrate here in huge numbers and impose their ways on us rather than accepting to change in order to integrate.

They cannot change without stopping being Muslim, of course. And there lies the problem. Why don't our ruling elites realise the obvious reality of what Islam is - after all, you just have to read the Quran and other Islamic scriptures, along with their many commentaries by experts like Robert Spencer and several others, whose criticisms of Islam very closely correspond to what we see with our own eyes and hear with our own ears, rather than clamorously clashing with them as those of Islam apologists do?

The answer to this question is in the paragraph I wrote just above the one containing the question: "decades of Leftist ideological rule".

The Left, putting into practice - in some cases knowingly, in others not - Cultural Marxism with its theory of cultural hegemony developed by Italian Communist Party's co-founder Antonio Gramsci, has managed to make a socialist revolution without blood spilling - until now at least.

It has used culture, rather than the storming of palaces, to impose its ideas on a vast mass of people who for 50-60 years have been watching the TV channels it controls, reading the papers it dominates, seeing the films that the liberal Hollywood produces, learning in schools and universities totally imbued with its ideology.

The results can be seen in the story reported at the top of this article:

He [a Somali Muslim] first raped and sodomized a drunk woman as she slept. Weeks later he anally raped a dying woman who overdosed on drugs.

Here we have the double effect of the Left's dominion on Western societies.

On one hand, great numbers of uncontrolled, unrestricted, often illegal immigrants from the most socially backward parts of the world - which are usually Muslim - are allowed into our countries bringing with them their unchecked and unrefined mores, without even an attempt on our part to make them adapt, since we must "celebrate diversity". After all, the Left thinks that we owe them, due to our - according to the Marxist revision of history - terribly imperialist past, and anyway simply because they are poor and we are - relatively - rich.

On the other, the idea that there is something more important in life than self-gratification, the ethical thinking that derives from the West's historical Christian roots, has been gradually abandoned, along with Christianity itself. "Religion is the opium of the people" was one of the greatest of Karl Marx's dogmas. Another was: morality is bourgeois, is another form of the capitalist class's oppression of the proletariat.

Make no mistakes. The terms and expressions used today may be different - after all, fashions change, language evolves -, but the ideas are exactly the same. Marx and Engels wanted the destruction of the family and thought that children should be reared communally. They both hated the family just as much as private property.

The family is patriarchal, is a capitalist institution, they believed. Much like the feminists of our modern times, who are in many ways heirs (or heiresses) to Marxism.

The Left is ideologically and historically anti-Christian, rejects the idea that sexual life is within the ethical sphere - "it's only love" -, and is lax in its morality and self-discipline.

The epidemics of alcohol and drugs abuse, obesity, shopaholism and indebtedness, welfare dependency, fatherlessness, sexually-transmitted diseases, and many more malaises of our societies derive from the same cause: the erosion of Christian values and the triumph of Leftist doctrines.

While more and more people seem to realise the former disastrous effect of the Left's control over Western countries - multiculturalism -, unfortunately not nearly as many understand the latter, no less tragic, effect - abandonment of Christianity with its non-self-centred worldview.

When I shared the post about the Somali rapist on Liberty GB's Facebook page, it got many comments, all invariably remarking on the "Muslim immigrant rapes Swedish women" aspect of the story, but not even one observing the fact that a woman was so drunken that she didn't even notice - she is described as asleep -, and the other was dying of a drugs overdose. And this despite my purposeful editing of the post with the addition of "a civilised (but with a serious drinking and drugs problem) society" in reference to Sweden, aimed at alerting to these very serious phenomena.

One of the ways, although by no means the only one, in which the neo-Marxist indoctrination of the masses has taken place is through such a distorted caricature of Christianity and its history that it makes them unrecognisable, and it would be funny were it not tragic.

Witness this interview with my fellow member of the Liberty GB party Jack Bucky, in which the interviewer claims that Catholics used to hang homosexuals (right at the end).

He's not to be blamed. He's just rehashing the kind of myths he must have heard innumerable times.

Photo of Muslim immigrants in London courtesy of the website Britain Gallery