Fjordman: The European Union and the Islamization of Europe.This makes it
the anti-European Union, an evil organization with no
From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Sat, 2008-02-09 2:10
A quote from Fjordman at Dhimmi Watch, 9 February 2008.....see below
Frankly, I don't think the EU has the right to use the term "European."
Those inhabiting the European continent
are first and foremost Germans, Dutchmen, Poles, Italians, Hungarians,
Portuguese etc. "Europe" has existed mainly to protect the continent against
Islamic expansionism. Charles Martel created Europe when he defeated the
Arab invasion in the seventh century, aided by people such as Pelayo, who
started the Reconquista in the Iberian Peninsula, John Hunyadi and Lazar of
Serbia who fought against the Turks
in the Balkans and John III Sobieski, King of Poland, who beat the Ottomans
during the 1683 Battle of Vienna. The EU is actively trying to undo
everything Charles Martel and these men achieved. This makes it the
anti-European Union, an evil organization with no moral legitimacy
whatsoever.
=========================
FrontPageMag.com By Robert Spencer By Hugh Fitzgerald Books Jihad Watch
Robert Spencer Islam 101 Qur'an Blog
« Egyptian court: "Islam is the final and most complete religion and
therefore Muslims already practice full freedom of religion and cannot
convert" | Main | Fitzgerald: Louise Arbour and human rights »
February 9, 2008
Fjordman: The European Union and the Islamization of Europe
Here's the latest from the noted European essayist Fjordman:
Hugh Fitzgerald of Jihad Watch recently suggested a number of things
Europeans can do to halt Islamization. The proposals were good, but I think
we should focus on the most important obstacle: the European Union. I've
suggested in the past that the EU is the principal motor behind the
Islamization of Europe, and that the entire organization needs to be
dismantled as soon as possible, otherwise nothing substantial can ever be
done about the Muslim invasion. At the Gates of Vienna blog, I am writing a
text called "Ten Reasons to Get Rid of the European Union," which can be
translated into other languages and be republished when it is completed.
As Bat Ye'or demonstrates in her book Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, senior EU
leaders have actively been working for years to merge Europe with the Arab
world. They are now feeling confident enough to say this openly. The British
Foreign Minister David Miliband in November 2007 stated that the European
Union should work towards including Middle Eastern and North African
countries, as this would "extend stability." He also said that the EU must
"keep our promises to Turkey" regarding EU membership.
The EU involves the free movement of people across borders. If it expands to
the Middle East, hundreds of millions of Muslims will have free access to
Germany, Italy, France, Britain, Sweden, the Czech Republic and Austria. If
Turkey becomes a member, it means that Greeks, Bulgarians and others who
have fought against oppression by Ottoman Turks for centuries will now be
flooded with Muslims from a rapidly re-Islamizing Turkey. The same goes for
Poles, Hungarians, Romanians and others who fought against Muslims for
centuries.
The EU's Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini states that
Europe must relax its immigration controls and open the door to an extra 20
million "Africans and Asians" during the next two decades. Most of these
"Africans and Asians" come from the predominantly Muslim countries of North
Africa and the Greater Middle East. The EU thus decided to flood Europe with
tens of millions of Muslims at the same time as peaceful Europeans
demonstrating against the Islamization of Europe were brutally harassed by
the police in the EU capital of Brussels. Frattini has also banned the use
of the phrase Islamic terrorism: "People who commit suicide attacks or
criminal activities on behalf of religion, Islamic religion or other
religion, they abuse the name of this religion." He thinks we shouldn't use
the word "immigration," either, we should talk about "mobility."
While Dutch politicians, in what was until recently a peaceful country, have
been killed for being too critical of Islam, while Islamic terror attacks
have murdered people in London and Madrid, while more terror attacks are
planned every single day from Italy via Paris to Denmark, and while people
from Sweden to Germany are subject to Muslim street violence and harassment,
EU leaders want to increase Europe's Muslim population by tens of millions
in a few years. This is criminal and evil, pure and simple.
In Cologne, Germany, a Muslim teenager who wanted to mug a 20-year-old
German man was killed in an act of self-defense, according to witnesses.
This led to angry protests from Muslims. Apparently, non-Muslims are not
supposed to defend themselves from attacks. This violence is usually
labelled "crime," but I believe it should more accurately be called Jihad.
Those who know Islamic history, as described in books such as The Truth
About Muhammad by Robert Spencer or The Legacy of Jihad by Dr. Andrew G.
Bostom, know that looting and stealing the property of non-Muslims has been
part and parcel of Jihad from the very beginning. In fact, so much of the
behavior of Muhammad and early Muslims could be deemed criminal that it is
difficult to know where crime ends and Jihad begins. In the city of Oslo, it
is documented that some of the criminal gangs also have close ties to
Jihadist groups at home and abroad. As Dutch Arabist Hans Jansen points out,
the Koran is seen by some Muslims as a God-given "hunting licence," granting
them the right to assault and even murder non-Muslims. It is hardly
accidental that while Muslims make up a minority of the population in
France, they make up an estimated seventy percent of French prison inmates.
Why would anybody in their right mind want to import Islam, the most
destructive force on the planet? Are EU leaders naïve? I don't think so, at
least not all of them. You cannot maintain political power in the long run
if you are totally naive.
We are told to treat cultural and historical identities as fashion
accessories, shirts we can wear and change at will. The Multicultural
society is "colorful," an adjective normally attached to furniture or
curtains. Cultures are window decorations of little or no consequence, and
one might as well have one as the other. In fact, it is good to change it
every now and then. Don't you get tired of that old sofa sometimes? What
about exchanging it for the new sharia model? Sure, it's slightly less
comfortable than the old one, but it's very much in vogue these days and
sets you apart from the neighbors, at least until they get one, too. Do you
want a sample of the latest Calvin Klein perfume to go with that sharia?
I have heard individuals state point blank that even if Muslims become the
majority in our countries in the future, this doesn't matter because all
people are equal and all cultures are just a mix of everything else, anyway.
And since religions are just fairy-tales, replacing one fairy-tale with
another one won't make a big difference. All religions basically say that
the same things in different ways. However, not one of them would ever dream
of saying that all political ideologies "basically mean the same thing."
They simply don't view religious or cultural ideas as significant, and thus
won't spend time on studying the largely unimportant details of each
specific creed.
In The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam's Threat to the West, Lee Harris
writes that: "What strikes us as irrationalities in the economic systems of
Third World nations, such as the red tape documented by [Peruvian economist
Hernando] de Soto, is not irrational at all from the point of view of the
dominant elite: It is part of what keeps them dominant. With enough red
tape, they can stay king of the mountain forever."
This reminds me a great deal of what the EU is doing, attempting to create a
permanent oligarchy by keeping the native population in line though a
combination of confusion, bureaucracy and intimidation from imported
Muslims.
Far from being an irrelevant detail, religion is the heart and blood of any
civilization. The greatest change (until now) in my country's history was
when we adopted Christianity instead of the Norse religion. This changed the
entire fabric of our culture. We became integrated into the mainstream of
Western civilization at about the same time as we went from being a tribal
society to a genuine state. Maybe Christianity helped in creating the
foundations of nation states with an individualistic culture. If so, perhaps
changing the religion is beneficial for those who want to replace nation
states with authoritarian transnational entities, for instance the European
Union. Islamic societies are always authoritarian. Those who want to abolish
the democratic system and rule as an unaccountable oligarchy thus naturally
prefer Islam.
The EU is an awful organization even if you don't take Muslim immigration
into account. Former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovksy, who is not
particularly preoccupied with Islam, fears that the European Union is on its
way to becoming another Soviet Union: "The sooner we finish with the EU the
better. The sooner it collapses the less damage it will have done to us and
to other countries."
The brilliant French political thinker Montesquieu advocated that the
executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government should be
assigned to different bodies, each of them not powerful enough alone to
impose its will on society. This is because "constant experience shows us
that every man invested with power is apt to abuse it, and to carry his
authority as far as it will go." This separation of powers is almost totally
absent in the EU, where there is weak to non-existent separation between the
legislative, the executive and the judicial branches, and where all of them
function more or less without the consent of the public.
As Montesquieu warned, "When the legislative and executive powers are united
in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no
liberty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate
should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner." He
also stated that "Useless laws weaken the necessary laws." The problem with
the EU is not just the content of laws, but their volume. Law-abiding
citizens are turned into criminals by laws regulating speech and behavior,
while real criminals rule the streets. This will either lead to a police
state, to a total breakdown in law and order, or both.
At least two conditions must be fulfilled in order to prevent the arbitrary
use of power. The first one is a system of formal checks and balances,
giving the possibility of peacefully removing officials who are not doing
their job. The second is transparency, so people know what their
representatives are doing. The EU deliberately ignores both these
conditions, but especially the latter. Vast quantities of power have been
transferred to shady backrooms and structures the average citizen hardly
knows exist. Eurabia was created through such channels.
The pompous former French president Valéry Giscard d'Estaing declared that
the creation of the proposed EU Constitution was Europe's "Philadelphia
moment," alluding to the Philadelphia Convention or Constitutional
Convention in the newly formed the United States of America in 1787. The USA
has its flaws, but if Mr. Giscard d'Estaing had actually understood the
American Constitution, he would have discovered that James Madison, Thomas
Jefferson and others took great care to implement a number of checks and
balances in the new state, precisely what is lacking in the EU. The American
constitution is relatively short and understandable, whereas the EU
Constitution is hundreds of pages long, largely incomprehensible and
displays an almost sharia-like desire to regulate all aspects of human life.
After it was rejected by Dutch and French voters, the Constitution has been
renamed and is now being smuggled through the back door.
Madison, Jefferson, George Washington and the American Founding Fathers
acted in the open and were generally elected by their peers and applauded
for their actions. Contrast this with Jean Monnet, who is credited with
having laid the foundations of the EU, despite the fact that most EU
citizens haven't heard of him. He was never elected to any public office,
but worked behind the scenes to implement a secret agenda. I read an
interview with a senior Brussels lobbyist who dubbed Monnet "the most
successful lobbyist in history." To this day, the EU capital of Brussels is
dominated by lobbyists. The Americans in Washington D.C. have their fair
share of lobbyists, too, and this can be problematic at times. The
difference is that the EU capital is dominated ONLY by lobbyists and
unelected bureaucrats, with little real popular influence. Those who read
the excellent British blog EU Referendum regularly will know that this
secretive modus operandi is still very much alive in the European Union.
Frankly, I don't think the EU has the right to use the term "European."
Those inhabiting the European continent are first and foremost Germans,
Dutchmen, Poles, Italians, Hungarians, Portuguese etc. "Europe" has existed
mainly to protect the continent against Islamic expansionism. Charles Martel
created Europe when he defeated the Arab invasion in the seventh century,
aided by people such as Pelayo, who started the Reconquista in the Iberian
Peninsula, John Hunyadi and Lazar of Serbia who fought against the Turks in
the Balkans and John III Sobieski, King of Poland, who beat the Ottomans
during the 1683 Battle of Vienna. The EU is actively trying to undo
everything Charles Martel and these men achieved. This makes it the
anti-European Union, an evil organization with no moral legitimacy
whatsoever.
The EU is gradually reducing the indigenous people of an entire continent to
the likely future status of second-rate citizen in their own countries. It
is quite possibly the greatest betrayal in the history of European
civilization since the fall of the Roman Empire, yet it is hailed as a
"peace project" in the media. It is shameful to witness the bullying
displayed by EU leaders vis-à-vis the Serbs, who are being forced to give up
their land to Muslim thugs. This template will eventually be used against
all Europeans. As Srdja Trifkovic warns, even if the Serbs are robbed of
Kosovo, Muslims will not thank the West:
"In Europe most nations want to defend themselves—even the ultra-tolerant
Dutch have seen the light after Theo van Gogh's murder—but cannot do so
because they are hamstrung by a ruling class composed of guilt-ridden
self-haters and appeasers. Their hold on the political power, the media, and
the academe is undemocratic, unnatural, obscene. If Europe is to survive
they need to be unmasked for what they are: traitors to their nations and
their culture. If Europe is to survive, they must be replaced by people
ready and willing to subject the issues of immigration and identity to the
test of democracy, unhindered by administrative or judicial fiat. For those
reasons too, Serbia must not give up Kosovo. By giving it up it would
encourage the spirit that seeks the death of Europe and its surrender to the
global totalitarianism of Muhammad's successors. Not for the first time, in
Kosovo the Serbs are fighting a fight that is not theirs alone."
Some hope we can keep the "positive" aspects of the EU and not "throw out
the baby with the bath water." I beg to differ. The EU is all bath water, no
baby. The EU got off on the wrong path from its very inception, and is now
so flawed that it simply cannot be reformed. Appeasement of Islam is so
deeply immersed in the structural DNA of the EU that the only way to stop
the Islamization of Europe is to dismantle the European Union. All of it.
Posted by Robert at February 9, 2008 7:03 AM
Print this entry | Email this entry | Digg this | del.icio.us
Comments
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect
the views of Dhimmi Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic,
offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted.
However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY
constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed
therein.)
Oh please tell me what Hugh Fitzgerald suggested so that Europeans can halt
Islamization ... the link doesnt work! And BTW Bergen-Belsen has been tried.
Posted by: David Xavier at February 9, 2008 7:18 AM
David,
Try it now.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Posted by: jihadwatch at February 9, 2008 7:58 AM
Why is it the responsibility of Europe, and ultimately the rest of the free
world, to "open the door" to millions of muslims? Who made them our problem?
The sooner the EU collapses, the better, but what will it take? Armed
uprisings by the citizens of Germany, Britain, France and all the other
European countries?
It isn't difficult to believe there really is a world-wide conspiracy to
bring about "a new world order". The question is, who is behind it and what
can be done about it?
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at February 9, 2008 8:09 AM
"Why is it the responsibility of Europe, and ultimately the rest of the free
world, to "open the door" to millions of muslims? "
Because the architect of The United States of Europe, Napoleon, demanded it
so.
"I hope that in the near future I will have the chance to gather together
the wise and cultured people of the world and establish a government that I
will operate [in accordance with the principles written in Qur'an
al-karim.]" (Koran)"
Napoleon.
Napoleon, communism, Islam and the EU are intricately linked.
Islam unites the people, the EU wants to be United, communism has failed.
The Archbishop tests the water with calls for Sharia.
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at February 9, 2008 8:17 AM
ThX Robert, ( though I am sure 'cordial' = 'wack behind the head ')
But nethertheless , a policy of discriminating a against Muslims , as Mr
Fitagerald commends will NOT occur unless the State becomes totalitarian (
due to all those pesky liberals) ... so my comment stands- it is the
consumption of Western civilisation or a reaction to save it that will be
brutal and "Balkan " in its obscenity ( and necessity).
Posted by: David Xavier at February 9, 2008 9:41 AM
Islam unites the people, the EU wants to be United, communism has failed.
posted by leonthepigfarmer
It really boggles my mind(ok, no mean feat) that someone would be willing to
deny who they are for something so abstract as "unity." I am a Texan. I do
not live in Texas, I am currently temporarily residing in Kansas, but I am
most definitely Texan. Please, no Toto or tornado jokes, heard them all in
the 8 years. Being a Texan has shaped who I am as a person. Fiercely
independent. I can not conceivably see myself willfully denying who I am in
this regard. I am also an American. As in the United States of American, not
North America, South America, or Central America. So it completely perplexes
me as to why many of the citizens of the nations on the continent of Europe
would want to forgo their identity and therefore vast culture for some
abortion known as the EU. If I were to quit being a Texan and an American,
then I am no longer me. Yes, I am aware of some of the many reasons given
for the EU, but it still doesn't make sense.
Posted by: Kevin at February 9, 2008 11:44 AM
Please stop with that fake quote about napoleon and islam. That's a myth
created by the muslim propagandists.
Posted by: Fedorenko at February 9, 2008 2:25 PM
Fedorenko
Please provide information and links please. I'm interested to see if Louis
Fauvelet was an islamist propagandist?
He wrote Napoleon's memoirs and was the one who published the Napoleon Koran
quote in 1889.
You claimed that "Please stop with that fake quote about napoleon and islam.
That's a myth created by the muslim propagandists."
Your job is to now back up your post.
Memoirs of Napoleon Bonaparte by Louis Antoine Fauvelet de Bourrienne edited
by R.W. Phipps. Vol. 1 (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1889)
Thanks
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at February 9, 2008 5:32 PM
Fedorenko
I think that you are mistaken and what you are confusing is Napoleon's
respect and admiration for a government based on the Koranic ideology as
Napoleon's conversion to Islam. No, Napoleon was never a Muslim convert as
professed by many Islamic web sites and blogs but Napoleon was a great
believer in the unity of the Koran and Islam and how this ideology would gel
together the United States of Europe.
Napoléon Bonaparte as quoted in Christian Cherfils, 'Bonaparte et Islam,'
Pedone Ed., Paris, France, 1914, pp. 105, 125.
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at February 9, 2008 5:39 PM
The EU is the most dangerous thing to happen to Europe since the Nazis. It
is the most corrupt institution on the planet. I can relate to what has been
said here about it being the vehicle for islamization. It is. In the UK we
are about to lose our right to govern ourselves. Our self appointed leader
Gordon Brown is ignoring the wishes of the British people by using
disingenuous arguments to refuse us a referendum. He knows that we will vote
the treaty out and so will not allow us a voice. This is the very antithesis
of democracy.
Our own self appointed prime minister is ignoring the majority of the
country. And that makes him a dictator. I am learning to hate this socialist
nightmare that you have foisted on us. But I won't run. I won't be quiet. I
will fight you every step of the way. You can have my democracy when you
prise it out of my cold dead hands.
Posted by: DaveMate at February 9, 2008 8:59 PM
Those who think that there is even a possibility of an armed uprising in
Europe against the EU and against a Muslim takeover of Europe have forgotten
that the governments of Europe have for the most part disarmed their
citizens so that they can not fight back. If I remember correctly, the
citizens of Brussels can not even legally carry pepper spray or mace to
defend themselves.
What I fear may be the precursor to a union between Canada, the US, and
Mexico will be a similar disarmament of the US citizen. The US Supreme Court
review coming up in June of gun control laws in Washington DC in which the
city is arguing that the constitution guarantees a collective, not an
individual right to keep and bear arms could be the beginning of the end for
our freedoms. If the Supreme Court was willing to sell out the private
property rights of working-class people to the interests of developers and
parasitic municipal politicians in the Kelo decision (5th Amendment issue),
then why not emasculate the 2nd Amendment as well?
"What evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow Know!"
Posted by: TheShadow at February 10, 2008 3:04 AM
The problem is far worse, and at a far more advanced stage, than you
think...
The EU deiberately ignores citizens. It believes it can deal with "the
problem" of religions through secularization and legislation preventing
"discrimination" and "intolerance". But it is far worse than this...
The EU and the UN are working together on policy instruments to "reduce
conflict" - and they have decided that a major part of the problem is
"divisive language" in society especially against religions.
In the future, there WILL BE LEGAL intervenion from both the EU (on its
citizens) and pressure on non-EU states (like USA, Canada, Australia)
through the United Nations. Therefore, there is a global trend towards a
standardizing policy; policy which will PREVENT even peaceful, well-meaning
dissent and counter-argument.
JihadWatch, DhimmiWatch and many other sites may soon become targets for
EU-UN legislation to reduce "religious hatred" since they will be deemed to
be "sources of social division".
If you're interested in this - and you are out of your mind if you are not -
watch the following EU and UN linked agencies:
1) The Alliance of Civiizations
2) The European Neighbourhood Policy
3) The Centre for Inquiry
4) The Council for Secular Humanism
5) The Committee fo the Scientific Examination of Religion
We are being identified now. We will be hunted down vey soon. Prepare.
Posted by: Stefcho at February 10, 2008 4:40 AM
Yes, Fjordman, the EU is destroying europe. Yes, Islam is bad. Yes,
europeans should voice their contempt for that. But... should we change one
fascism (eurabians+muslims) with another (neo-nazism)?
I usually like the things you write, but seeing the bed fellows you have,
Fjordman, everything you say gets tainted by it.
The anti-jihad movement doesn't need neo-nazis on our side. Truth doesn't
need falsehood, as it is written "No lie is of the truth" (1 John 2:21).
Posts
