Saturday, March 31, 2007

Death of the West: The Cultural Revolution

A while ago I finished reading Death of the West by Patrick Buchanan. I was not familiar with the author prior to reading the book, and would in all likelihood not have come across his book had a close friend not urged me to read it. I'm glad I did read it, and for a number of reasons which I will endeavour to share with you. It discusses a number of crucial issues which may be summarised as the following: a dying population, mass immigration, an anti-Christian culture, and 'the breakup of nations and the defections of the ruling elites to a world government whose rise entails the end of nations'. I intend to post about all of those issues but if I'm to give each area the proper attention I'm going to have to do it one by one. So I'll start with the cultural revolution. This post is actually less of a review, and more of a summary. I quote Buchanan at length, and keep my commentary to a minimum, so as to keep the post as short as possible (even so its pretty long). First things first though; although I think the book is immensely useful when it comes to explaining certain things, it does have some drawbacks, so I'll start with them.

There are 4 main faults. First is the use of the term Judao-Christian throughout the book. Although the author is not a Christian Zionist he persists in using the phrase and I can only assume that he is covering his back after having been accused of being an anti-semite many times. Therefore since he is already bringing up very controversial issues such as the cultural revolution (and naming Jewish names), and promoting Christian values, he feels a need to temper the possible fallout and not rock the boat even more. Usually the nonchalant use of the term bothers me, but in the context of the information and values he conveys in his book, I'm willing to overlook it in this instance.
Secondly, being an American, a large portion of the book is understandably devoted to examining American problems and possible solutions. While I found his information and thoughts interesting, I confess that I have no emotional attachment to America. Even though it has patently been hijacked for malevolent means, I don't have much affinity for the founding fathers or the Old America. If Buchanan thinks America can climb out of the present hole it has dug for itself then good luck to him. But I'm not holding my breath, and I'm more concerned with Europe, and most of all with Orthodox nations.
Thirdly, being an ex-Presidential candidate, and Republican, Buchanan does show some flicker of hope in the democratic process and even his former party. To his credit he does ravage Republican policy, Republican politicians, the political and judicial system, but out of some sort of nostalgia or wishful thinking, hopes that the situation can be reversed using the democratic process. That after he spent the whole book outlining that the media, political, educational institutions are all firmly tied up in the hands of those he opposes.
Fourthly he talks in broad terms about the West without really giving a definition.

Cultural Revolution
Buchanan starts off by stating that America has 'undergone a cultural revolution, with a new elite now occupying the commanding heights.' He observes: 'What was immoral and shameful- promiscuity, abortion, euthanasia, suicide- has become progressive and praiseworthy'.
He traces the start of this revolution to 1914, which in my opinion doesn't go back far enough, but in his analysis of the situation from that moment on, he brings up some very interesting points. He describes how during WW1, that apart from in Russia, the workers had failed to rally to the revolutions launched in their name. Nothing the marxists had predicted had come to pass. Two of Marx's disciples advanced an explanation: 'they had not risen in revolution because their souls had been saturated in two thousand years of Christianity, which blinded them to their true class interests.' Until Christianity were uprooted the revolution would be betrayed by the workers in whose name it was to be fought.
The first 'dissenting disciple' was Hungarian Georg Lukacs who had the following solution to the problem: 'I saw the revolutionary destruction of society as the one and only solution. A worldwide overturning of values cannot take place without the annihilation of the old values and the creation of new ones by the revolutionaries'. As deputy commissar for culture in the Hungarian communist regime, Lukacs put his self-described 'demonic' ideas into action in what came to be known as 'cultural terrorism'. Buchanan summarises:

As part of this terrorism he instituted a radical sex education program in Hungarian schools. Children were instructed in free love, sexual intercourse, the archaic nature of middle-class family codes, the outdatedness of monogamy, and the irrelevance of religion, which deprives man of all pleasures.

The second disciple was Antonio Gramsci, an Italian communist who had seen that Bolshevism did not work, and that the regime could only compel obedience through terror.

Gramsci concluded it was their Christian souls that prevented the Russian people from embracing their Communist revolution. 'The civilized world had been thoroughly saturated with Christianity for 2000 years', Gramsci wrote; and a regime grounded in Judeo-Christian beliefs and values could not be overthrown until those roots were cut... Marxists must first de-Christianize the West.

Rather than seize power first and impose a cultural revolution from above, Gramsci argued, Marxists in the West must first change the culture; then power would fall into their laps like ripened fruit. But to change the culture would require a 'long march through the institutions'- the arts, cinema, theater, schools, colleges, seminaries, newspapers, magazines, and the new electronic medium, radio. One by one, each had to be captured and converted and politicized into an agency of revolution. Then the people could be slowly educated to understand even welcome the revolution. Gramsci urged his fellow Marxists to form popular fronts with Western intellectuals who shared their contempt for Christianity and bourgeois culture and who shaped the minds of the young.

On the cover of his 1970 runaway bestseller The Greening of America, the manifesto of the counterculture, author Charles Reich parroted Gramsci perfectly: There is a revolution coming. It will not be like revolutions of the past. It will originate with the individual and with culture, and it will change the political structure only as its final act. It will not require violence to succeed, and it cannot be successfully resisted with violence. It is now spreading with amazing rapidity, and already our laws, institutions, and social structure are changing in consequence... This is the revolution of the new generation.

In 1923, Lukacs and members of the German Communist party set up, at Frankfurt University, an Institute for Marxism modelled on the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow which would come to be known as the Frankfurt School. The Jewish Max Horkheimer became its director.

At Horkheimer's direction, the Frankfurt School began to retranslate Marxism into cultural terms...To old Marxists the enemy was capitalism; to new Marxists, the enemy was Western culture... Victory would come only after Christian beliefs had died in the soul of Western man. And that would happen only after the institutions of culture and education had been captured and conscripted by allies and agents of the revolution.

The following extract from the book could easily be passed over by many, but it is telling: 1933, history rudely intruded. Adolf Hitler ascended to power in Berlin, and as the leading lights of the Frankfurt School were Jewish and Marxist, they were not a good fit for the Third Reich. The Frankfurt School packed its ideology and fled to America.

Two of the more famous Jews were Erich Fromm and Theodor Adorno (who changed his surname from Wiesengrund). Among the new weapons of cultural conflict that the Frankfurt School was to develop was Critical Theory. One student described it as the 'essentially destructive criticism of all the main elements of Western culture, including Christianity, capitalism, authority, the family, patriarchy, hierarchy, morality, tradition, sexual restraint, loyalty, patriotism, nationalism, heredity, ethnocentrism, convention and conservatism'.

Under Critical Theory, one repeats that Western societies are history's greatest repositories of racism, sexism, nativism, xenophobia, homophobia, anti-semitism, fascism, and Nazism. Under critical theory, the crimes of the West flow from the character of the West, as shaped by Christianity...Critical Theory eventually induces 'cultural pessimism', a sense of alienation, of hopelessness, of despair where, even though prosperous and free, a people comes to see its society and country as oppressive, evil and unworthy of loyalty or love. The new Marxists considered cultural pessimism a necessary precondition of revolutionary change.

They flatly asserted that individuals raised in families dominated by the father, who are flag-waving patriots and follow the old-time religion, are incipient fascists and potential Nazis. As a conservative Christian culture breeds fascism, those deeply immersed in such a culture must be closely watched for fascist tendencies.... As early as the mid-1960s, conservatives and authority figures who denounced or opposed the campus revolution were routinely branded 'fascists'. Baby boomers were unknowingly following a script that ran parallel to the party line laid down by the Moscow Central Committee in 1943:

Members and front organizations must continually embarrass, discredit and degrade our critics. When obstructionists become too irritating, label them a fascist, or Nazi or anti-Semitic...The association will, after enough repetition, become 'fact' in the public mind.

Since the 1960s, branding opponents as haters or mentally sick has been the most effective weapon in the arsenal of the left.

During the 1950s, the Frankfurt School lacked a personality to popularize the ideas buried in the glutinous prose of Horkheimer and Adorno. Enter Herbert Marcuse. (Editors note: another Jew)

Marcuse provided the answer to Horkheimer's question: Who will play the role of the proletariat in the coming cultural revolution? Marcuse's candidates: radical youth, feminists, black militants, homosexuals, the alienated, the asocial, Third World revolutionaries, all the angry voices of the persecuted 'victims' of the West.

Past societies had been subverted by words and books, but Marcuse believed that sex and drugs were superior weapons. In Eros and Civilization, Marcuse urged a universal embrace of the Pleasure Principle. Reject the cultural order entirely, said Marcuse, and we can create a world of 'polymorphous perversity'.

For cultural Marxists, no cause ranked higher than the abolition of the family, which they despised as a dictatorship and the incubator of sexism and social injustice... Wilhelm Reich believed the way to destroy the family was through revolutionary sexual politics and early sex education. The appearance of sex education in elementary schools in America owes a debt to Lukacs, Reich and the Frankfurt School.

In the death of the West, the Frankfurt School must be held as a prime suspect and principal accomplice. The propaganda assault on the family it advocated has contributed to the collapse of the family.

The pill and condom have become the hammer and sickle of the cultural revolution.

In a third of a century, what was denounced as the counterculture has become the dominant culture, and what was the dominant culture has become, in Gertrude Himmelfarb's (Editors note: yet another Jew) phrase, a 'dissident culture'. We see it in the mandatory requirement for 'sensitivity training' in the military, in business, and in government. Turn on the TV and observe. The values of the revolution dominate the medium. Political correctness rules. Defiance of our new orthodoxy qualifies as 'hate speech', disrespect for its dogmas as a sign of mental sickness.

Political correctness is cultural Marxism, a regime to punish dissent and to stigmatize social heresy as the Inquisition punished religious heresy.

People who today accept these ideas 'cannot know that they were hatched in a Marxist nursery in Weimar Germany' or that their purpose was to 'subvert our culture and overturn our civilization'.

Why they succeeded

Buchanan proposes a number of elements that came together:

First was 'the message in a bottle', as the men of the Frankfurt School called their ideas.

Second, there arrived on campus, beginning in 1964, a huge cohort of youth who had known niether hardship nor war. The cultural revolution now had a huge, captive, and receptive audience. Spoiled and affluent, carefree, confident, liberated, and bored, these young people were ready for rebellion.

Third, 1960s television could convey the tactics and triumphs of campus radicals and urban revolutionaries instantly to their peers.

Through its control of the culture, the Left dictates not only the answers, but the questions asked. In short, it controls the cosmological apparatus by which most Americans comprehend the meaning of events. This cosmology is based on two great axioms: the first is that there are no absolute values in the universe, no standards of ugliness, good and evil. The second axiom is- in a Godless universe- the Left holds moral superiority as the final arbiter of man's activities.

I'll end todays commentary with a rousing quote:

Political adversaries who use terms like Nazi, fascist, anti-Semite, nativist, homophobe, bigot, xenophobe, and extremist have started a fight and should be accommodated.

I'll add that its time, not to be silenced, but to take their 'Critical Theory' and shove it right back in their faces with the same gusto that they try to shove it into ours. Two can play the game of constant repetition and demonisation, and since the truth is not on the side of those degenerates, we can beat that at their own game!

Death of the West can be bought on Amazon for no more than a couple of dollars used.
Technorati tags;
death west patrick buchanan cultural revolution critical theory frankfurt school

Friday, March 30, 2007

Former NBA player suspended for applauding Jewish power

Yes it seems that if you make a factual statement about Jewish power, even if you pretend you're enamoured and delighted that they possess it, they'll still label you a bigot and anti-semite:

Richardson will miss the rest of the CBA's best-of-five championship series after he told The Albany Times Union that he had "big-time Jew lawyers" working for him.
"They got a lot of power in this world, you know what I mean? Which I think is great," Richardson told The Times Union on Tuesday. "I don't think there's nothing wrong with it. If you look in most professional sports, they're run by Jewish people. If you look at a lot of most successful corporations and stuff, more businesses, they're run by Jewish. It's not a knock, but they are some crafty people."

Taken from Fox news

The reporters claimed that he also shouted an anti-gay slur during a match. Since this is unverifiable, unlike his previous comments, I have my suspicions that they used this accusation to beef up their claims that he is a bigot (since they're claims look ludicrous otherwise) and slander him across the whole of the politically incorrect spectrum. I wouldn't put it past them. In other words, paint him as an ignorant and irrationally hateful buffoon (not that I think he's a potential nobel prize winner) on multiple counts, and then you can disregard everything he ever said, throw it all down the memory hole.
I'm a bit stretched with various commitments at the moments, so its been slow in coming, but I'm hoping that I'll have my review of Death of the West completed by tomorrow...

Technorati tags;
richardson jewish power bigot

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Exclusive: Parliament Meeting on NATO aggression

It was around 6:40 yesterday evening that I strolled past the main entrance to parliament with a comrade. On the other side of the main road we could make out the unmistakeable figure of Brian Shaw lying back in a deckchair, his hat covering his face. I don’t think anyone could begrudge him a nap after over 2000 days of non-stop protesting against the various globalist wars. We made our way over to St. Stephens entrance and after going through a metal detector and being searched we were inside parliament. We headed for committee room 15 on the first floor and as we entered the long corridor that led to the room, we were met by the image of the former British Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli. He should be researched by those who are interested in what the Jews have to say about themselves (a quick search yielded this and this). I took a picture of the portrait (below) before being shouted at by a security guard to put the camera away. What’s the point of allowing cameras into the building if they won’t let you use them? As we continued to walk down the corridor a small lift opened over to my left hand side and as I glanced over to see who was getting out I thought I recognised a familiar face. My friend nudged me and I realised that it was indeed Tony Benn. It seems that he had decided to make a surprise appearance in order to give his support. I would have approached him to give my congratulations to him for his demolition of John Bolton in last weeks ‘Question time’ and also to thank him for his unfaltering support of Serbia, but he was engaged in conversation with an acquaintance. It was almost exactly 8 years ago to the day that I last had the honour of seeing Tony Benn and listening to him speak. He was the only MP to speak at a demonstration I attended against the war in 1999. I remember news came through that an American bomber had been shot down during the rally and the crowd went berserk. Brings back memories!
The meeting got underway at around 7:10 after a minutes silence. The small committee room was more or less full. I recognised a few faces from the Serbian community, an elderly professor, and an even more elderly community leader. Unfortunately the Serbian youth was represented by only myself, the comrade I arrived with, and another who arrived later. It seems that the rest of our generation either have short memories, or are completely disinterested in anything but trying to fit into contemporary Western culture. I’d estimate around 90% of people were aged over 35, and around 60% over 50.
The meeting was chaired by the tall figure of Misha Gavrilovic whose command of English was excellent. He introduced the various speakers, minus Neil Clark who had not yet arrived. First to speak was Tony Benn. He began by making two points that I’d actually vehemently disagree with. The first was about how heroic Serbia was for declaring war against Hitler before Russia and America. It seems that these days moral judgements are made almost entirely on ones similarity or opposition to Hitler. Hitler had offered us neutrality which, in hindsight, would have been the best option. Declaring war on him on behalf of ‘allies’ unprepared and unable to back us up, being crushed within 6 weeks, losing millions of Serb lives, and being ruled by communists for 40 years hardly seems like an intelligent decision. The second point I’d disagree with is Benn’s point about Tito being an example to others and doing ‘interesting things’ with Yugoslavia. Now it is true that a major reason the West wanted to dismember Yugoslavia was due to its ‘closed’ socialist economy but I’d hardly regard Tito and his God-less, soulless state in a positive light. Anyway after these points Benn went on to talk about the illegality of the war that was waged, how the UN charter was in tatters, and how America was an empire in decline. But he rightly said that a wounded animal can be a very dangerous one!
Next up was Bob Wareing MP, a short, overweight, but jovial looking man, who unfortunately looks like a heart attack waiting to happen. He spoke of his experiences in Bosnia. He told a telling story about how he was taken to a mass grave of Serbs near Bosanski Brod and described the stench of death, and decapitated bodies. When he had tried to raise media attention, a Scottish newspaper had refused to cover the story on the basis that the mass grave contained Serbs, not Muslims or Croats, and would therefore only serve to ‘confuse’ people. Yes it appears that it didn’t fit in with the goodie-baddie agenda that the media was busy implementing. He then went on to talk about Kosovo where he made another point I’d oppose. He was talking about how the Albanians constitute a vast majority, and how many had come from Albania after WW2. He said that, being a socialist, he had absolutely no problem with open borders and population movement, but that Kosovo should still remain a sovereign part of Serbia! Talk about naivety! So we shouldn’t care about borders when it comes to immigration, but we should assert our nominal right to them when the minorities become majorities and want to break away!
After Bob, former MP Alice Mahon spoke. She told of her visit to Yugoslavia during the NATO bombing and reminded people that 80% of the targets that were hit by NATO bombs were civilian, including bridges, factories, oil refineries, power stations, water supplies, media installations, and even residential homes. It was nothing less than an attempt to demoralise the entire nation and to shut down any chances of a viable economy. This she said was a war crime, but added that she wasn’t holding her breath that there would be a trial since NATO had helped set up the Hague in the first place. Nothing more than a victor’s court. She also highlighted the destruction of hundreds of Serbian monasteries and churches as a war crime against a people’s culture and mentioned the numerous mosques that have been built since 1999, mainly with money from Saudi Arabia.
Neil Clark, made a late entrance somewhere in the middle of Alice’s speech and was introduced after she had finished. His was arguably the best contribution. He covered a lot of points and was able to be a bit more gung-ho (probably due to the fact that he wasn’t a politician), in his denouncement of ‘the Empire’ and even the ‘New World Order’. He made the valid point that Kosovo was not an isolated case, but was part of a continuum. The ongoing Western aggressions against Afghanistan, Iraq, and possibly Iran in the near future are all part of the Empires attempts to secure global hegemony. Anyone who refuses to appease the Empire gets taken apart mercilessly, whereas countries with more oppression than Yugoslavia ever had, such as Egypt, and Pakistan are allowed to do what they like since they tow the line, allow American bases, open up their economies and remain subservient. He described how Milosevic was the first ‘new Hitler’, then came others such as Saddam, and now Ahmadinejad. I fully agree with him about the futility of the illogical rationale behind supporting say the aggression against Serbia, but not the one against Iraq, or vice versa. You either oppose the Empire or you don’t. You can’t accept they have malevolent intentions one minute, and then pretend that they have benevolent intentions the next. Also mentioned by Neil was the way in which the Serb economy has been carved up amongst the victors. The once 80% state-owned economy has been opened up to foreign multi-nationals. He scathingly attacked the Western brand of ‘democracy’ which labels everything that approves of the empire as ‘democratic’, and ‘moderate’ and pointed out that the Serb Radical Party had won the last two elections but were considered unsuitable ‘partners’ for the West since they opposed the EU etc etc.
The last speaker was an MP who I was unfamiliar with, but who had been on the Foreign Affairs Committee for Kosovo . He spoke only shortly, mainly to say how bad the current situation was, and to warn that the breakaway of Vojvodina (the northern most Serb province) would be on the cards in the future. He was apparently instrumental in coaxing the Foreign Affairs Committee into admitting that the NATO action was illegal. They nonetheless claimed it was not immoral. So they were morally justified in committing a criminal act! As Gavrilovic pointed out that’s the argument of terrorists everywhere! I’ll remember that if I ever need to act outside the law to fight against the tyranny of the Empire!
The meeting was concluded after a few statements/questions from the floor. A couple of elderly Serb women rightly complained about the biased media in Serbia which constantly bangs on about the EU and about the indoctrinated youth which aspires only to copy the West and attain its living standards.
All in all it was interesting experience and I learnt some facts I can use in the future. What I found telling though, was that all these speakers railed against the economic, political and military crimes of the West. All these crimes stand and I fully endorse their view in this regard. But what they totally ignored was that the same powers are attacking and dismantling faith and promoting secularism. They are dismantling national identity and promoting multi-culturalism. And though it obviously wasn’t the topic for discussion, I doubt any of them would have questioned the motives or actions of the Empire in this regard. This seems analogous to the fanciful notion that Neil Clark attacked regarding military action: They believe that the N.W.O. has positive intentions in some respects, but not in others. The products of the liberal and God-less cultural revolution that the West is exporting are arguably the biggest and most dangerous assault a people can face. Serbia lost around 3000 people during the physical war over Kosovo, but we are losing hundreds of thousands of souls to the contemporary ‘Western’ culture which means spiritual and national death. As Patrick Buchanan says in ‘Death of the West’, there are four clear and present dangers: The first is a dying population. Second is mass immigration of peoples of different colors, creeds, and cultures. Third is the rise to dominance of a culture deeply hostile to tradition and morality. The fourth is the break up of nations and the defection of ruling elites to a world government whose rise entails the end of nations. You can’t just attack the fourth one but accept the other three as natural occurrences. I doubt any of the speakers would have been inclined to attack mass immigration, secularism, abortions, gay rights etc, yet they are all the product of the globalist agenda they denounce.

Technorati tags;
london parliament yugoslavia nato bombing kla kosovo meeting tony benn gavrilovic neil clark alice mahon bob wareing

Sunday, March 25, 2007

The Holy Forty-two Martyrs from Ammoria

I meant to post this on the day that the Martyrs are commemerated (19th March) but it slipped my mind. Better late than never I suppose:

They were all commanders of the Byzantine Emperor Theophilus. When the Emperor Theophilus lost the battle against the Saracens at the city of Ammoria, the Saracens captured the city, enslaved many Christians and among them these commanders. The remaining Christians were either killed or sold into slavery. The commanders were thrown into prison where they remained for seven years. Many times the Muslim leaders came to them. They counseled and advised the commanders to embrace the Islamic Faith, but the commanders did not want to hear about it. When the Saracens spoke to the commanders, saying, "Mohammed is the true prophet and not Christ," the commanders asked them, "If there were two men debating about a field and the one said, `This field is mine,' and the other, `It is not, it is mine,' and near by, one of them had many witnesses saying it is his field and the other had no witnesses, but only himself, what would you say, `Whose field is it?'" The Saracens answered, "Indeed, to him who had many witnesses!" "You have judged correctly," the commanders answered. That is the way with Christ and Mohammed. Christ has many witnesses: the Prophets of old, from Moses to John the Forerunner, whom you also recognize and who witness to and about Him [Christ], but Mohammed witnesses only to himself that he is a prophet and does not have even one witness. The Saracens were ashamed and again they tried to defend their faith in this manner: "Our faith is better than the Christian Faith as proved by this: God gave us the victory over you and gave us the best land in the world and a kingdom much greater than Christianity." To that the commanders replied, "If it were so, then the idolatry of the Egyptians, Babylonians, Hellenes, Romans, and the fire-worship of the Persians would be the true faith for, at one time, all of these people conquered the others and ruled over them. It is evident that your victory, power and wealth do not prove the truth of your faith. We know that God, at times, gives victory to Christians and, at other times, allows torture and suffering so as to correct them and to bring them to repentance and purification of their sins." After seven years, they were beheaded in the year 845 A.D. Their bodies were then thrown into the Euphrates river, but they floated to the other side of the shore where they were gathered and honorably buried by Christians.
From the 'The Prologue from Ohrid', by Nikolaj Velimirovic.
Technorati tags;
martyrs ammoria byzantine christianity islam saracens theophilus

Friday, March 23, 2007

Albanian and KLA Drug-trafficking

Three laboratories for processing hashish have been uncovered in Albania, and Albanian police are supposedly launching a crackdown on cannabis plantations. Yes, believe it or not Albania has cannabis plantations! And there was me thinking they were only responsible for the transportation and sale of drugs (in amongst the prostitution, weapons smuggling and people trafficking)!
In case anyone thinks that Albanian crime rings and their connections to terrorism are urban myth or vile Serbian propaganda, several authoratitive reports back up my claims:

According to the European Union Situation Report On Drug Production And Drug Trafficking 2003 – 2004, (virtually every single page is peppered with references to Turkish and Albanian criminal networks):

Turkish and Albanian networks may handle a consignment of heroin one day and arrange the trafficking of human beings the next.

Albanian criminals act as enforcers of security for Turkish trafficking groups, following a pattern that was first established in those European countries where Albanians now dominate the heroin trade.

The proceeds from their criminal activities are used in the Member State where they operate or sent to Albania and Kosovo.

It is abundantly clear that the proceeds from these criminal activities have been used for violent political ends in Kosovo. According to the American Russian Law Institute:

Albanian trafficking networks are becoming more and more powerful, partly replacing Turkish networks. This is especially the case in several German speaking countries, Sweden and Norway. According to some estimations, Albanian networks control about 70% of the heroin market today in Switzerland, Germany, Austria and the Scandinavian countries. According to analyses of the Swedish and Norwegian police, 80% of the heroin smuggled into the countries can be linked to Albanian networks. In 1998, Swiss police even estimated that 90% of the narco-business in the country was dominated by Albanians. Throughout Europe, around 40% of the heroin trade seems to be controlled by Albanians. Recent refugees from the Kosovo region are involved in street sales.

Albanian organized crime groups are hybrid organizations, often involved both in criminal activity of an organized nature and in political activities, mainly relating to Kosovo. There is certain evidence that the political and criminal activities are deeply intertwined. Also, it has become increasingly clear that Albanian crime groups have engaged in significant cooperation with other transnational crime groups.

Albanians, particularly Kosovars, have developed a sense of collective identity necessary to engage in organized crime. It is this element, based on the affiliation to a certain group, which links organized Albanian crime to Panalbanian ideals, politics, military activities and terrorism. Albanian drug lords established elsewhere in Europe began contributing funds to the "national cause" in the 80’s. From 1993 on, these funds were to a large extent invested in arms and military equipment for the KLA (UCK) which made its first appearance in 1993.

The Kosovo conflict and the refugee problem in Albania resulted in a remarkable influx of financial aid. Albanian organized crime with links to Albanian state authorities seems to have highly profited from these funds.

There might still be links between political/military Kosovar Albanian groups (especially the KLA) and Albanian organized crime. Of the almost 900 million DM which reached Kosovo between 1996 and 1999, half was thought to be illegal drug money.

So it is clear that crime money was used to finance Albanian terrorism in Kosovo the only question left is whether the US and NATO were aware of this (since they claim the most benevolent of intentions). This US Senate Republican Policy Committee report makes it abundantly clear that not only was the Clinton administration aware of the links, but that they also were a second source of financing and training for the KLA.

As is to be expected America's 'ethical' foreign policy chops and changes (not something that would happen if policy was based on a moral foundation). Originally the KLA were regarded as a terrorist group:

Clinton Administration's then-special envoy for Kosovo, Robert Gelbard, had little difficulty in condemning the KLA (also known by its Albanian initials, UCK)'We condemn very strongly terrorist actions in Kosovo. The UCK is, without any questions, a terrorist group,' Gelbard said." [Agence France Presse, 2/23/98]

But scarcely more than one year later, the man that was to run for Vice-President claimed:

"[The] United States of America and the Kosovo Liberation Army stand for the same human values and principles ... Fighting for the KLA is fighting for human rights and American values." (Sen. Lieberman quoted in the 'Washington Post,' April 28, 1999)

Presumably he meant that American values included violence to achieve strategic objectives, complete disregard for the sovereignty of other states, drug trafficking, money laundering, and assassination of opponents. The Senate report alludes to not just the US alliance with the KLA, but the open knowledge that the KLA was involved with a massive Albanian criminal network:

Among the most troubling aspects of the Clinton Administration's effective alliance with the KLA are numerous reports from reputable unofficial sources -- including the highly respected Jane's publications -- that the KLA is closely involved with: The extensive Albanian crime network that extends throughout Europe and into North America, including allegations that a major portion of the KLA finances are derived from that network, mainly proceeds from drug trafficking.

"In order to get the Albanians'... acceptance [of the peace plan], Ms. Albright offered incentives intended to show that Washington is a friend of Kosovo...Officers in the Kosovo Liberation Army would . . . be sent to the United States for training in transforming themselves from a guerrilla group into a police force or a political entity, much like the African National Congress did in South Africa." [New York Times, 2/24/99]

So supposedly showing one is a friend of a province (if that even means anything) is to take one ethnic group within the province, and give its most extreme (and violent) element military training. On the right is a picture of Albright with the former head of the KLA who subsequently became Kosovo's prime minister, Agim Çeku .
In the year 2000, CIA intelligence agents admitted to the London Sunday Times to having been training, equipping and supporting KLA fighters as early as 1998 -well before the NATO air strikes began, at the very time when the White House was pretending to be a mediator striving to resolve the conflict in Kosovo. The hypocrisy of the US was clear for all to see. The problem was that this was one isolated article, not a concerted media campaign like the one which demonized Serbs as the new Nazis.
Technorati tags;
albania drugs kla kosovo crime prostitution trafficking nato

Thursday, March 22, 2007

Homosexual school stories for 4-year olds

Over on BNP news I've found yet another story regarding homosexual interference in childrens education:
A tale of a handsome prince and an aging queen ready for retirement is a classic setting for a children’s fairy tale but when the handsome prince falls for another handsome prince it’s time to ask just what is going on?Children as young as four will be introduced to such stories which promote homosexual relationships as new gay rights laws come into force in April. There are already several primary schools taking part in the taxpayer-funded study (costing £600,000) to introduce children to homosexuality.
Academics have claimed that telling the children "gay stories" will reduce homophobic playground bullying. However, groups opposed to the indoctrination of children say that schools could face legal action if they refuse to use the gay books.
The books include "King & King" where a prince refuses three princesses before he falls in love and marries one of their brothers; "Spacegirl Pukes" in which the leading character has two mothers; and a story about two male penguins who meet and fall in love in a New York zoo.
So homosexual penguins are perfectly Ok, but apparently heterosexual pigs are not:
A Church of England school in Yorkshire has renamed the favourite childrens’ story "The Three Little Pigs" so that Muslims will not be offended.
The story is now called "The Three Little Puppies", after the organisers of a music festival changed the story and lyrics because of the multi-cultural make up of the children and the audience.
Honley Church of England Junior School, near Huddersfield, were due to perform the story at a concert at Huddersfield Town Hall, which featured children from 63 schools. But Kirklees Primary Music Festival organisers decided that the script must be altered to make it more "sensitive" to Muslims, and it would be responsible to remove the references to pigs. It was believed that Muslim children would not sing along to words about pigs, and it was better to change the wording than to cause offence.
Technorati tags;
gay indoctrination education

Bored with 'the Holocaust'

German police cadets in training in Berlin reportedly responded to a talk on anti-Semitism by saying they were bored hearing about the Holocaust. The incident is under investigation, Deutsche Welle reported. The police academy recruits allegedly also said that Jews are known to be rich.
“If these accusations prove correct, there will be consequences,” said Police President Dieter Glietsch.
Isaak Behar (pictured below), an 83-year-old Holocaust survivor who gave police cadets an eyewitness account of the Nazi era, said he was satisfied by the school’s response to the cadets.
But some Jewish leaders say that the incident is symptomatic of increasing anti-Semitism.
“A rise in anti-Semitism is apparent everywhere,” Rabbi Andreas Nachama told the Berliner Zeitung. “This is both regrettable and disturbing.”
Story available here.
Meanwhile The Central Council of Jews in Germany has called for the country's Nazi history to be taught as a separate subject! Maybe they could model it on British GCSE History which covers little else apart from 'The Evils of the Nazis'. The German teachers union has called the proposal 'wrong and unjustified', maybe they should be put on trial and diagnosed with pathological boredom along with the police recruits!

Technorati tags;
holocaust police anti-semitism

Monday, March 19, 2007

Serb police raid Wahhabi terrorist camp

Four wahhabi muslims have been arrested and a huge cache of explosives and weapons have been found near the town of Novi Pazar in southern Serbia. The area around the town is one of the few majority Muslim areas in whats left of Serbia (not including Kosovo). I visited the beautiful monastery of Mileseva (pictured below) situated near the town a couple of years ago and I had the misfortune to pass through this God-forsaken area. I really don't see a lasting solution to the Muslim question in Serbia which doesn't include permanent expulsion. We have a million or so Muslims in Bosnia, 2 million in Kosovo, and now we have to deal with these upstarts in whats left of Serbia. None of the mainstream media outlets seem to want to touch this story with a 10 foot barge pole, so I had to link to B92, a nauseatingly ultra-liberal Serbian media organisation who should be on trial for treason. Throughout the 90's this US poodle agitated for overthrow of the government and for all kinds of secular Western ideals like homosexual and minority rights. This was while we were engaged in a monumental struggle for national self-determination and survival. They are now getting their knickers in a twist because an anonymous individual has set up this internet site dedicated to the now disbanded anti-terrorist commando unit, the Red Berets. At a time when we could sure use the Red Berets they are whining about the 'worrying message' being sent out by this site. The Cyrillic around the Red Berets' emblem reads: 'Terrorism is an illness, its time to call the doctor'. How evil, I'm sure its just an excuse for some ethnic cleansing! CNN practically declared it a national sport so it must be true!
_______________________________________________ Technorati tags;

Meeting on 8th Anniversary of NATO Aggression

I've just recieved an email with the following information regarding the meeting next tuesday:

House of Commons Public Meeting to commemorate:
The 8th Anniversary of NATO Aggression against Yugoslavia

Also to be discussed:
  • Future of Kosovo
  • Judgement on Serbia in the Hague
  • Lessons of the past year


Bob Wareing, MP Member for Liverpool West Darby

Alice Mahon, former Labour MP, The last witness at Milosevic Trial

Neil Clark, Journalist and writer

Misha Gavrilovic, Nedaist Initiative

Scheduled for: Tuesday, 27th March 2007 7-8:30 pm

Committee Room 15

House of Commons

St Stephens Entrance

NB: Please come at least 10-15 minutes before the start time in order to pass security check at St Stephens Entrance and get to Committee Room 15.

I've done a quick background check on the speakers since one is a former Labour MP, and the other a current Labour MP. My search yielded the following:

Bob Wareing seems to be constantly rebelling against Labour party policy which is a good sign, but God knows why he's still a member. Apparently he takes a very strong interest in international affairs, particularly eastern Europe and the former Soviet bloc and was one of the few Labour MPs to oppose the NATO military action in Kosovo.

It appears that I would probably vehemently oppose Alice Mahon on social issues, as she appears to be a typical socialist, a supporter of the British Humanist Assosciation, and an assosciate of the National Secular Society. But her stance on the NATO aggression seems to be principled and this wikipedia description of her testimony to the Hague as a defence witness for Slobodan Milosevic is interesting:

Mahon told the court that she considered the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 to have been illegal and “purely political”. She suggested that the bombing was the main reason that hundreds of thousands of Kosovo Albanians fled their homes in 1999, rather than persecution by the state security services. She also said that Albanians that she spoke with afterwards informed her that they had been told to leave by the rebel Kosovo Liberation Army, KLA. Mahon even went so far as to say that she believed the air strikes had deliberately been aimed at civilian targets. “I feel passionately that NATO should be in the dock in this place as well,” she told the court. The witness also called into question the prosecution’s account of an attack by government forces on the village of Racak in January 1999, said to have left some 45 Albanians dead.
She said that her experience of
William Walker, the head of the OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission who was amongst the first to travel to Racak and speak out about the alleged massacre, was “appalling”. Mahon said that Walker had been involved with the Contra paramilitaries in Nicaragua in the 1980s and recalled that conversations with soldiers, charity workers and Kosovo residents had led her to believe that the OSCE was under the influence of the American CIA: “I certainly don’t think we should have destroyed a country based on what Mr William Walker said,” she told the court, adding, “I think there was something highly suspicious about what happened at Racak.”

For the remaining two speakers I have found a trancript of one of Misha Gavrilovic's interviews with Sky news and what seems to be Neil Clarks blog (I'm assuming its the right Neil Clark). This article bodes well and could be considered a short primer on the breakup of Yugoslavia and Milosevic in particular.

Friday, March 16, 2007

Why Europeans should not support Israel

This is a light analysis of fjordmans latest essay entitled Why Europeans should support Israel, available on the Brussels Journal. While fjordman has written some stunning essays in the past, I can't help but note that his understandable disliking of Islam and the Islamification of Europe has led him to draw some erroneous and untenable conclusions. They are the conclusions not of someone looking dispassionately at the facts, but of someone who is so desperate to create an anti-Islamic block that he throws all commonsense and history out of the window. He advocates an alliance of convenience (in reality its only really convenient for Israel), but tries to sell it like a moral, historical, cultural, and religious obligation. Without beating about the bush here are some excerpts and my commentary:

One of the most frustrating things to watch is the powerful anti-Israeli and sometimes outright anti-Semitic current that is prevalent in too much of Europe’s media. Bat Ye’or’s predictions about Arab anti-Semitism spreading in Europe as the continent’s Islamization and descent into Eurabia continues have so far proved depressingly accurate.

Where is the evidence that Muslims are influencing Europeans? If they are rebelling against Muslims, why would they be adopting Muslim viewpoints? There is no causal link whatsoever. Muslims may be guilty of much, but of inspiring European anti-Semitism, I don’t think so. However if we don't accept fjordmans conveniently simple assumption it means that we might need to examine more complex and uncomfortable possibilities, namely that the resentment against Jews is not based simply on blind hatred.

This trend needs to be fought, vigorously, by all serious European anti-Jihadists. Not only because it is immoral and unfair to Israelis, which it is, but also because those who assist it are depriving Europeans of the opportunity to fully grasp the threat and understand the nature of the Jihad that is now targeting much of Europe as well.

He doesn’t justify his statement that not supporting Israel is ‘immoral and unfair to Israelis’, which is a major assumption. Furthermore the intensity and ferocity of the conflict in the occupied territories does indeed show us to what lengths Muslims will go when they have a fight on their hands. The legitimacy of that fight is quite another issue. Comparing the potential takeover of Europe to the reclamation of a small strip of land in the Middle East which Israelis siezed off Palestinians more than half a century ago is useless.

Hagen said that if Israel loses in the Middle East, Europe will succumb to Islam next. He felt that Christians should support Israel and oppose Islamic inroads into Europe.

What a preposterous argument this is. Israel is not in Europe, is not a European nation, and has no geopolitical or material significance to Europe whatsoever. Europe existed for centuries before Israel existed and can do so again perfectly well without its existence. The plight of the Israelis is of no relevance to Europeans. Blind support for Israel merely invites Islamic attacks on Europe. The lukewarm language of opposing ‘Islamic inroads into Europe’ is absolutely useless in any case. The way that an Islamic takeover of Europe can be prevented is by deporting Muslims from Europe, not by supporting an apartheid state and inflaming Muslims the world over, while spouting useless rhetoric about Islamic takeover.

Most European media commentators are hostile to the Jewish state of Israel, partly because they get angry with anybody defending themselves against Islamic Jihad instead of surrendering, and partly because they want to project their own feelings of guilt from the Holocaust onto Israel by recasting the Jews as villains and the Palestinians as victims.

Only a minority of European nations were complicit in ‘the Holocaust’, so how can the rest have guilt about a holocaust they never committed? Yet anti-Semitism is rising all over Europe, particularly in Eastern Europe. Why does the only possible scenario that Judaeo-philes can come with always involve guilt about anti-Semitic actions, and cast the Jews as victims. I put it to fjordman that manufactured guilt for ‘the Holocaust’ was and is a tool used to grant Jews and Israel special benefits.

Spanish journalist Sebastian Villar Rodriguez claims that Europe died in Auschwitz: “We assassinated 6 million Jews in order to end up bringing in 20 million Muslims!”

This Spaniard that fjordman quotes also stated the following:
We burnt in Auschwitz the culture, intelligence and power to create. We burnt the people of the world, the one who is proclaimed the chosen people of God. Because it is the people who gave to humanity the symbolic figures who were capable of changing history (Christ, Marx, Einstein, Freud...) and who is the origin of progress and wellbeing.

This is nothing short of brain-dead, subservient and illogical glorification of the Jewish race, which if any one else attempted with any other race, would lead to accusations of racism. As if Europe was so dependant on ‘the people of God’ that without their culture, intelligence and creativity we are nothing but clueless morons. Secondly, leaving aside Einstein, how can a man revere Christ, Marx, and Freud simultaneously? This man clearly cannot be Christian if he utters Marx and Freuds name in the same breath, yet he pretends that he’s grateful that the Jews gave us Christ? Thirdly even if he was Christian, by what logic should we grateful to modern day Jews for Christ. Modern day Jews are infact largely descendants of the Khazars. And if one claims that they are ‘spiritual’ descendants of the original Jews, then they are the self-proclaimed spiritual descendants of the Pharisees who Jesus condemned, and who killed him for it.

French philosopher Alain Finkielkraut thinks that Auschwitz has become part of the foundation of the European Union, a culture based on guilt. “I can understand the feeling of remorse that is leading Europe to this, but this remorse goes too far.” It is too great a gift to present Hitler to reject every single aspect of European culture. This is said by the Jewish son of an Auschwitz prisoner.

He’s right Auschwitz is part of the foundation of the EU, and ‘the Holocaust’ is the official religion.

As Hugh Fitzgerald notes, “Fortunately for so many, and for the Arabs, the victory of Israel in the Six-Day War promptly provided a reason to depict Jews as villains, not victims. This found an eager audience of Europeans, who were already eager for psychological reasons to find fault with Jews so as to avoid thinking unduly about the behavior of many European peoples and states during the war.

More of the same. These people are so close-minded that they always limit peoples possible motives to either irrational hatred, or in this case, as a method of avoiding coming to terms with how much we persecuted the Jews. Are there really no other possible explanations apart from the eternal victim hypothesis?

The damage done to the morale of Europe because of the destruction of European Jewry has been great.

Mainly because the guilt has been stuffed down our throats by a media that negates the possibility of corporate guilt when it comes to Jewish political, media and economic control, but finds it perfectly acceptable to assign guilt for a holocaust on an entire continent, or to call the Serbs ‘guilty as a nation’ for a war which was instigated by the West.

If Western Europe, or the West generally, were after all that has happened to permit Israel to go under, Europe would not recover.”

This guy needs help. He’s been so brainwashed that he thinks that the destiny of Europe is inextricably linked to that of Israel.

Europeans need to understand how closely intertwined are the fates of Israel and of Europe itself. The term “Judeo-Christian” is not a cliche.

The term Judeo-Christian did not even appear in its current context until the mid 1930’s which really tells you all you need to know. For almost 2000 years the two faiths existed separately, and suddenly in 1930 the modern term appeared, for obvious political reasons. It appeals to a nonexistent historical unity and calls for a banal, modernist theology. It is in fact the theology of a non-believer. Any Christian that believes Christianity is incomplete without adding the term ‘Judeo’ before it, clearly does not believe in the truth of Christianity in the first place. The reverse is also true. Show me a Jew who believes that Christianity has contributed to Judaism. "Judeo-Christianity" should be seen for what it is - another secular twentieth century fraud, manufactured for narrow political ends. If the values of the 2 are so interchangeable why are they two different religions?
Even Jews agree: Joshua Jehouda, a prominent French Jewish leader, observed in the late 1950s:
"The current expression 'Judaeo-Christian' is an error which has altered the course of universal history by the confusion it has sown in men's minds, if by it one is meant to understand the Jewish origin of Christianity . . . If the term 'Judaeo-Christian' does point to a common origin, there is no doubt that it is a most dangerous idea. It is based on a 'contradictio in abjecto' which has set the path of history on the wrong track. It links in one breath two ideas which are completely irreconcileable, it seeks to demonstrate that there is no difference between day and night or hot and cold or black and white, and thus introduces a fatal element of confusion to a basis on which some, nevertheless, are endeavouring to construct a civilisation." (l'Antisemitisme Miroir du Monde pp. 135-6).
The Judean historian Josephus wrote: "What I would now explain is this, that the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by succession from their fathers, which are not written in the laws of Moses . . ." While the Pharisees recognized the laws of Moses, they also claimed that there was a great body of oral tradition which was of at least equal authority with the written Law - and many claimed that the Tradition was of greater authority. By their tradition, they undertook to explain and elaborate upon the Law. This was the "Tradition of the Elders", to which the name of Talmud was later given. It had its beginning in Babylon, during the Babylon captivity of the people of Judah, where it developed in the form of the commentaries of various rabbis, undertaking to explain and apply the Law. This was the foundation of Rabbinic Judaism. This Judaism was very different from the religion of the ancient Israelites. The late Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, who was the Chief Rabbi of the United States, expressed this conclusively when he said: "The return from Babylon, and the adoption of the Babylonian Talmud, marks the end of Hebrewism, and the beginning of Judaism." The Jewish Encyclopaedia tells us that the Talmud is actually "the product of the Palestinian and Babylonian schools" and is generally referred to as "the Babylonian Talmud". Dr. Boaz Cohen in Everyman's Talmud states the Talmud is the work of "numerous Jewish scholars over a period of some 700 years, roughly speaking, between 200 [B.C.] and 500 [A.D.]."Rabbi Louis Finkelstein in Volume 1 of The Pharisees, the Sociological Background of their Faith says, "Pharisaism became Talmudism, Talmudism became Medieval Rabbinism, and Medieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbinism. But throughout these changes of name, inevitable adaption of custom, and adjustment of Law, the spirit of the ancient Pharisee survives unaltered." According to The Universal Jewish Encyclopaedia, Vol. VIII, (1942) p.474 : "The Jewish religion as it is today traces its descent, without a break, through all the centuries, from the Pharisees. Their leading ideas and methods found expression in a literature of enormous extent, of which a very great deal is still in existence. The Talmud is the largest and most important single member of that literature."Moshe Menuhim explains that the Babylonian Talmud embodied all the laws and legends, all the history and 'science,' all the theology and folklore, of all the past ages in Jewish life -- a monumental work of consolidation. In the Talmud, Jewish scholarship and idealism found their exclusive outlet and preoccupation all through the ages, all the way up to the era of Enlightenment. It became the principal guide to life and object of study, and it gave Judaism unity, cohesion and resilience throughout the dark ages. The Talmud, more than any other literature, so defined Judaism that Rabbi Ben Zion Bokser admitted, "Judaism is not the religion of the Bible." (Judaism and the Christian Predicament, 1966, p.159) It is the Talmud that guides the life and spirit of the Jewish people." The Talmud is to this day the circulating heart's blood of the Jewish religion. Whatever laws, customs, or ceremonies we [Jews] observe -- whether we are Orthodox, Conservative, Reform or merely spasmodic sentimentalists -- we follow the Talmud. It is our common law." (A History of the Jews, Solomon Grayzel).Both Jewish and Christian scholars agree that it was Jesus Christ's flagrant rejection of this "Tradition of the Elders" and his open confrontation with the powerful Pharisees that created the climate that led to his death. Historically, Christian thinkers argued that the Talmud was directly responsible for the rejection of Christ. In their view these "traditions" blinded the eyes of the people to a true understanding of the prophecies which related to the coming of the Messiah.

Anyway to wrap up fjordmans essay:

We cannot defend Western civilization without defending its Jewish component, without which modern Western culture would have been unthinkable.

As if modern Western culture is perfectly healthy.

The religious identity of the West has two legs: The Christian and the Jewish ones.

This is quite simply the most bizarre and desperate reasoning I have come across in a long time. The only point he is correct on is that Jews have shaped modern western culture, but they have done this by dismantling the positive (ie truly Christian) elements of this culture. In other words, they have contributed, but their contribution has been one of dismantling and perverting. The way fjordman puts it, one would think that there was a blissful symbiotic relationship between the two.

It needs both to stand upright. Sacrificing one to save the other is like fighting a battle by chopping off one of your legs, throwing it at the feet of your enemies and shouting: “You won’t get the other one! We will never surrender!” We could always hope that our enemies will laugh themselves to death faster than we bleed to death, the Monty Python way of fighting. Maybe that works, but most likely it will leave us crippled and pathetic, if not dead.

The analogy verges on the ridiculous. Europe and Israel are hardly comparable. If we were to take the analogy even further: then the leg of Europe would be 6ft long and the leg of Israel would be a small and rotting stump that should be severed before it infects the only healthy leg left. Israel needs European and American support but Europe does not need Israel at all.

Likewise, we can only begin to heal our self-inflicted civilizational wounds if we embrace the Jewish component of our cultural identity.

This is perhaps a fittingly ridiculous end to what is without doubt the worst essay I have seen fjordman come up with. It is though a growing trend that a lot of people who have recently familiarised themselves with the Islamic problem feel an urge to form an unholy alliance and to desperately pretend that there is no other problem but the Islamic one. As if a secular and multi-cultural Europe would be absolutely fine as long as all the immigrants were not Muslims. The whole moral order was in deep decay already. A lot of bloggers have felt compelled to embed one of the ‘I stand with Israel banners’ which alludes to a Biblical verse from Genesis 12:3. It is based on a flawed interpretation of scripture. Only Christian Zionists believe the bizarre view that the modern state of Israel is promised to Jews just because they are the supposed ethnic descendants of the Israelites, and that it is a Christian duty to uphold it. But either a whole lot of anti-Islamic bloggers are converting to this strange sect of evangelical Christianity or they are dishonestly using a convenient misinterpretation of Scriptures and trying to pass it off as a generally accepted mainstream teaching for their own ends. Christian Zionism may well be a topic that I will dismantle in the future if I have the time. Until then I leave you with the words of St. Nikolaj:

“the wonder is that the Europeans, baptized and anointed, should have surrendered so totally to the Jews that they think with Jewish minds, accept Jewish programmes, adopt Jewish anti-Christianity, receive Jewish lies as truth, welcome Jewish catch-words as their own, walk along the Jewish path and serve Jewish aims. This is the thing to wonder at in our time, and nothing else in the world. Everything else is less important or unimportant. But the most important thing is how Christian Europe managed to become the serving maid of the Jews... Think on these things, brother Serbs..."

Thursday, March 15, 2007

School gags children after 'gay' indoctrination

I called the previous news story extraordinary, and this one is just as outrageous. Its connected to the last story since it involves the indoctrination of children contrary to their parents wishes, or in this case, knowledge. 14 year old children in the US were forced to attend a seminar on homosexuality, but not before signing a confidentiality agreement not to tell their parents!
The news comes courtesy of BNP and Me blog yet again.
These stories are closely related to a book I read recently by Patrick Buchanan, called 'Death of the West', in which he describes the cultural revolution that has led to this state of affairs. I'll most likely be writing a review of it in the next week or so.

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Patriarchal obedience as a mental disorder, hatred of parents as normal

Over on the BNP and Me blog, I came accross the extraordinary news that a girl in Germany was taken from her family by police and placed in a mental asylum under the most absurd pretexts imaginable. The girl was being homeschooled, and apparently the German state has a tendancy to harrass people who choose to educate their children in this way (probably because it interrupts the flow of state propaganda at the most impressionable age). She was diagnosed with something officials called "school phobia." However the head of Erlangen Youth Welfare Office, Edeltraud Hölleren, insisted that the Busekros case is not about homeschooling. The agency's psychiatric evaluation of the girl, mentions something else: her devotion and obedience to her father Hubert, which is portrayed as a mental disorder. The evaluation says that Melissa is "a highly disturbed girl who obediently and faithfully obeys the idealistic statements of her father and who describes the State as being despotic and 'fascist-like'." Well shes not wrong there.
It adds, with a concerned tone, that "Melissa demonstrates loyalty towards her father and unconditional solidarity with her family."
"They say I am influencing the children too much…," said Hubert. "They want to stop any influence of the father."Joerg said, "If you have a good relationship to your children -- a very close relationship like in the Busekros case, it seems to be in the eyes of the officials, something which is dangerous."
The Busekros' attorney Gabriela Eckermann told a judge in the case, "For the Erlangen Youth Welfare Office, 15 year olds only seem to be "normal" if they live according to their own wishes…if they do not love their parents…but…rebel against them cooperate with…the police, court, youth welfare office and experts…against their own parents."Gudrun said, "…that our daughter is loyal to us or has the same convictions we have? This is not normal for them.""For us, it's very important to be able to bring our children up without being directed by the state or government officials, because it's the right of the parent alone to bring up their children," said Hubert. Melissa is now with a foster family at a secret location while a court fight continues. Hubert and Gudrun are only allowed to see their daughter one hour a week. And there are fears that the police may return, and take their other five children, as well."I know that God is helping us," Gudrun said, "but humanly speaking, we have no help against these people…what can we do against them?

Sunday, March 11, 2007

The Holy Martyr John, the builder

This saint was born in Galata in Constantinople. By occupation he was an architect, a builder. Because of his ardent confession of the Christian Faith, John offended the Turks and they began to pressure him to become a Muslim. "I will not deny my Sweet Jesus Christ," John bravely replied. "In Him I believe; Him I serve; Him, I confess." Following grave tortures, the Turks beheaded him on this day in 1575 A.D. in Constantinople. He suffered honorably for his beloved Christ and took up habitation in the mansions of the Lord.
From the 'The Prologue from Ohrid', by Nikolaj Velimirovic.

Thursday, March 08, 2007

First David Irving account since release

Here is an interesting account of the way David Irving was arrested prior to being sentanced to 3 years imprisonement, written by the man himself. In 2005 he went to give a lecture in Vienna, and the thought police were waiting to arrest him for a speech he had made in 1989! After a narrow escape from secret police on the Viennese streets, they tracked him down and intercepted him on route to the Italian border, using the satellite navigation system from a car he had rented in Switzerland to pinpoint him! British Big brother is gaining ground: more than 4m CCTV cameras, new powers for bailiffs to break into peoples homes to enforce debt payment, ID cards and the storage of the populations DNA on a central database that the EU will have access to.

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Legalised incest and Ataturk-worship

Germany is on the verge of passing a law legalising incest by the looks of it. Everywhere you the moral code of old is being trampled upon, and if you refuse to conform then you're a bigot. The lawyer mentioned in this BBC report parrots the same nauseating rhetoric: discrimination etc etc. He claims 'the law against incest is based on very old moral principles'. I'm sure the party that would like to see paedophilia legalised in Holland would agree. The use of the word 'old' as if it somehow implies that something is wrong, limited, or inferior really does get to me. If one has a moral principle then its eternal. So don't tell me its old, have the guts to tell me its wrong. But these type of people don't have any morals, save mainly some hippy/pacifist tendency that makes them feel good about themselves. The only sin they recognise is racism, and the only sin that needs to be atoned for in their eyes is the holocaust.
Totally unconnected to this little rant of mine, I notice that Turkey has banned access to youtube after clips had been found that insulted Ataturk- the revered former Turkish leader. Insulting Ataturk or "Turkishness" is an offence which can result in a prison sentence.

Monday, March 05, 2007

Russian Orthodox Church rejects PC Charter

Over on the Orthodox England site I noticed that Russian Orthodox Church refuses to approve the Ecumenical charter of European Churches on the basis that:
‘The Ecumenical Charter embodies the inferiority complex of European Christian Churches, their capitulation in the face of challenges from the secular world’
I recall a quote from a book I read recently which stated the following:
As many young priests and pastors themselves no longer believed in the inerrancy of the truths they had been taught, and they did not want to be left behind as the young departed, they attempted the impossible: to reconcile Christianity to the counterculture. But in their desperation to make themselves relevant, they only made themselves ridiculous.
And nowhere is this more evident than in the following assertion:
'On the one hand, the Charter proclaims that Christianity is the spiritual foundation of Europe, but, on the other hand, cultural and religious pluralism are at the same time encouraged’
Talk about signing your own death warrant. And an effort to make themselves relevant would not be complete without a liberal sprinkling of shameless sucking up to Jews. The bizarre self-flaggelation that these 'churches' insist on defies logic. At one point the charter suggests that:
'Christians should repent for the persecution of Jews’.
But if anyone ever persecuted Jews it was never the Churches themeselves, so what do they have to be sorry for? Even if one accepted every single aspect of the holocaust dogma, at what point was the Russian Orthodox Church guilty of gassing people? Why would they want to sign such a statement?
And to the following heresy I can only reply: Read the Talmud. The Talmud was not around at the time of Jesus, but is now the most holy text for Jews. In it one may discover what kind of respect Jews have for Christians:
It is urgently necessary, in the worship and teaching, doctrine and life of our churches, to raise awareness of the deep bond existing between the Christian faith and Judaism, and to support Christian-Jewish co-operation.
And naturally dialogue with Islam is encouraged:
We would like to intensify encounters between Christians and Muslims and enhance Christian-Islamic dialogue at all levels. We recommend, in particular, speaking with one another about our faith in one God, and clarifying ideas on human rights.
Who do these 'churches' think they are? They clearly regard their role as a political rather than a spiritual one. Why would Christians need to clarify ideas on human rights. Christians have their own values, what possible enhancement can dialogue with Islam bring to Christianity? The actual implication is of course to try and bring Muslim values into closer alignment with the values these churches espouse. But whats the point? They have a responsibility to preach the truth, not transform Islam to a faith which is more acceptable to the EU elite so that immigration and the multicultural utopia can continue unfettered. In any event Islam shows infinitely more resistance to reform than any of these pseudo-churches and it would be utter naivety to believe that people with such little conviction can influence them. These churches are just doing the bidding of the political elite who want to make sure that all religions espouse some kind of mish-mash, politically correct, human-rights type of morality which is compatible with secular, multi-cultural Europe.

Saturday, March 03, 2007

Bases of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church

From the Jubilee Bishops' Council of the Russian Orthodox Church issued on August 13 - 16, 2000, in Moscow under the title of Bases of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church:

The universal nature of the Church, however, does not mean that Christians should have no right to national identity and national self-expressions. On the contrary, the Church unites in herself the universal with the national. Thus, the Orthodox Church, though universal, consists of many Autocephalous National Churches. Orthodox Christians, aware of being citizens of the heavenly homeland, should not forget about their earthly homeland. The Lord Jesus Christ Himself, the Divine Founder of the Church, had no shelter on earth (Mt. 8:20) and pointed that the teaching He brought was not local or national in nature: «the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father» (Jn. 4:21). Nevertheless, He identified Himself with the people to whom He belonged by birth. Talking to the Samaritan woman, He stressed His belonging to the Jewish nation: «Ye worship ye know what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews» (Jn. 4:22). Jesus was a loyal subject of the Roman Empire and paid taxes in favour of Caesar (Mt. 22-16-21). St. Paul, in his letters teaching on the supranational nature of the Church of Christ, did not forget that by birth he was «an Hebrew of the Hebrews» (Phil. 3:5), though a Roman by citizenship (Acts 22:25-29). The cultural distinctions of particular nations are expressed in the liturgical and other church art, especially in the peculiarities of Christian order of life. All this creates national Christian cultures. Among saints venerated by the Orthodox Church, many became famous for the love of their earthly homeland and faithfulness to it. Russian hagiographic sources praise the holy Prince Michael of Tver who «gave his life for his fatherland», comparing his feat to the martyrdom of the holy protomartyr Dimitrius of Thessaloniki: «The good lover of his fatherland said about his native city of Thessaloniki, 'O Lord, if you ruin this city, I will perish together with it, but if you save it, I will also be saved'». In all times the Church has called upon her children to love their homeland on earth and not to spare their lives to protect it if it was threatened. The Russian Church on many occasions gave her blessing to the people for them to take part in liberation wars. Thus, in 1380, the venerable Sergius the abbot and miracle-maker of Radonezh blessed the Russian troops headed by the holy Prince Dimitry Donskoy before their battle with the Tartar-Mongol invaders. In 1612, St. Hermogen, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, gave blessing upon the irregulars in their struggle with the Polish invaders. In 1813, during the war with the French aggressors, St. Philaret of Moscow said to his flock: «If you avoid dying for the honour and freedom of the Fatherland, you will die a criminal or a slave; die for the faith and the Fatherland and you will be granted life and a crown in heaven». The holy righteous John of Kronstadt wrote this about love of one's earthly homeland: «Love the earthly homeland… it has raised, distinguished, honoured and equipped you with everything; but have special love for the heavenly homeland… that homeland is incomparably more precious that this one, because it is holy, righteous and incorruptible. The priceless blood of the Son of God has earned that homeland for you. But in order to be members of that homeland, you should respect and love its laws, just as you are obliged to respect and really respect the laws of the earthly homeland». II. 3. Christian patriotism may be expressed at the same time with regard to a nation as an ethnic community and as a community of its citizens. The Orthodox Christian is called to love his fatherland, which has a territorial dimension, and his brothers by blood who live everywhere in the world. This love is one of the ways of fulfilling God's commandment of love to one's neighbour which includes love to one's family, fellow-tribesmen and fellow-citizens. The patriotism of the Orthodox Christian should be active. It is manifested when he defends his fatherland against an enemy, works for the good of the motherland, cares for the good order of people's life through, among other things, participation in the affairs of government. The Christian is called to preserve and develop national culture and people's self-awareness. When a nation, civil or ethnic, represents fully or predominantly a monoconfessional Orthodox community, it can in a certain sense be regarded as the one community of faith — an Orthodox nation. II. 4. At the same time, national sentiments can cause such sinful phenomena as aggressive nationalism, xenophobia, national exclusiveness and inter-ethnic enmity. At their extremes, these phenomena often lead to the restriction of the rights of individuals and nations, wars and other manifestations of violence. It is contrary to Orthodox ethics to divide nations into the best and the worst and to belittle any ethnic or civic nation. Even more contrary to Orthodoxy are the teachings which put the nation in the place of God or reduce faith to one of the aspects of national self-awareness. Opposing these sinful phenomena, the Orthodox Church carries out the mission of reconciliation between hostile nations and their representatives. Thus, in inter-ethnic conflicts, she does not identify herself with any side, except for cases when one of the sides commit evident aggression or injustice.