The EU, the Afro-Asian of Europe and Islam
Thank you for forwarding me this article [below] about the EU, immigration and Islamism from the 28th July issue of the Italiani Libri magazine.I find the article quite hard to penetrate because whoever made the effort to translate article into English did not have a sufficient grasp colloquial English to assist a dullard such as me. (If you were the translator, please accept my apologies for ingratitude.)I found some of the content and analysis quite interesting, though I do not follow the author's contention [paragraph 3] that"> "The EU was made expressly for this purpose: let the> ubiquitous Muslims invade the West in the easiest way> possible...."[NB: I have replaced the translator's "the coming-all-over-Muslisms" to "the ubiquitous Muslims".]
In making this claim, the author has not taken into account the impact of what has been described as "The Law of Unforeseen Consequences". (In England we have a special version of this law called "Sod's Law" which, roughly translated, means: if something CAN go wrong, it WILL go wrong -- and always at the most inconvenient moment! But I digress.)
The reason why France is being invaded by Muslims is because of the French colonial history in North Africa. That history also accounts why France is being invaded by various sub-Saharan Africans.Britain is being invaded by Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh for the same reason that it is being invaded by Hindus and Sikhs from the India and Sri Lanka: because of Britain's colonial history in the Indian sub-continent.Likewise Britain is being invaded by Afro-Caribbeans from the West Indies and Africans from sub-Saharan Africa because of its colonial history in those regions.
Similarly, Holland (The Netherlands) is being invaded by Muslims from Indonesia and elsewhere in S.E. Asia on account of Holland's colonial history in S.E. Asia.These various colonial histories were developed long before the European Union was ever thought of and when the various Imperial powers of Europe were in bloody competition with each other.
I cannot speak of the experience of France or Holland, but certainly the invasion of Britain by various Afro and Asiatic immigrants was well under way DECADES before Britain ever joined what was initially the "European Common Market", later renamed the "European Union".I do not know why Italy is made a target for the African multitudes -- perhaps because its coastline is near North Africa; perhaps because of the subversive policies of the Catholic Church, every hungry for new converts, regardless of race.
The only reason I can advance for Norway, Sweden and Denmark inviting in the Coloured multitudes, especially Muslims, is because the Nordic countries have become utterly decadent and have a death-wish.
The trigger for the invasion of Britain was the passing by Parliament in 1948 of "The British Nationalities Act". This gave a kind of notional "British Nationality" to the entire population of what had become known as the "British Commonwealth", formerly (pre-WW2) "the British Empire"..... a fifth of the world's population!
The "British Nationalities Act of 1948" was presented as a symbolic gesture as Britain, bankrupt from fighting two world wars, set about dismantling the old British Empire.
The Act was portrayed as a sentimental version of 'Civis Romanus Sum' arrangement which was operated in the days of the Roman Empire.
The parliamentarians who framed that Act promoted it as a way of giving some kind of quasi-legal meaning to the emerging "Commonwealth of Nations" of which the monarch of Britain was merely "The Head", NOT the King -- let alone the Emperor!
Whether any of them foresaw that huge numbers of Afro-Asians would seek to give tangible effect to the gesture and actually seek to enter and settle in Britain we shall never know.
Perhaps most of these parliamentarians had no idea of the unintended consequences which ultimately attended upon their legislation. Perhaps a few had a notion that a supply of cheap foreign labour would enter Britain and under-cut the higher wages and work conditions which the long-suffering British working class had started to demand when a Labour government was elected in 1945.
But as I say, all these were factors in play long before the EEC, let alone the EU -- or even before the formation of the European Coal and Steel Community, which many saw as the embryo of the EU/EEC.
If blame is to be allotted for the deliberate encouragement of the mass invasion of the nations of Europe by millions of racially alien and culturally unassimilable people from Afro-Asia, then I would put it at the door of of a variety of culprits:
Category 1: An alliance of Leftist/Liberal/Anarchist multi-racialist, internationalist "do-gooders" who had the inane "Idealism" which pre-existed John Lennon's song "Imagine", but which was well-expressed in that song.
Category 2: Daft, soppy Christians who supported almost all of the beliefs of Category 1, save that they did believe in an after-life with Jesus under a rainbow on the Sunny Side of the Sugar-Candy Mountain.
Category 3: Big Business tyrants who endlessly seek monopoly not only within nations, but between nations, until global monopoly is constructed. Global monopoly can only be achieved fully if nations, with their separate and individuals laws, currencies, borders and, most crucially, their ethnic homogeneity and sense of identity, can be abolished.
Category 4: Organised Jewry which, through Zionism and its totem pole, Israel, is seeking to reconstitute a Jewish nation, but which sees itself threatened by all other nations on earth. Jewry will never feel itself secure from threats such as those presented by Haman and Hitler, until all other nations on the globe are cease to exist by being melded together in a huge multi-racial stew-pot.
The Board of Deputies of British Jews designed the first "Race Relations Act of 1967" (originally drafted as "The Group Libel Law" in the early 1950s) to suppress and criminalise the "racism" of indigenous British people (who had never given a mandate for a multi-racial society to be constructed in their homeland).
The Board framed all of the various amendments to that act until the 1980s.But once again, the "Law of Unintended Consequences" kicked-in.
For nearly five decades Anglo-Jewry was more than happy to see Britain submerged by Afro-Asians.
But Jewry woke up to the fact that among all these Black, Brown and Yellow folk who were busy robbing the British people of possession of their own native land were millions of Muslims who were enemies of Israel and of Zionism and who looked set fair to breed themselves into a majority status within an ever-increasing number of parliamentary constituencies in Britain.
Despite Jewry's FINANCIAL stranglehold over the Establishment political parties in Britain, their power could be undermined if an increasing Muslim electorate could influence the voting patterns of people elected to Parliament, even if those people themselves were not themselves Muslims.
Politicians want to get RE-ELECTED!
So Jewry has, by the "Law of Unintended Consequences", created for itself it own potential executioner. By encouraging Coloured Immigration into Britain (and Europe) in order to prevent White Gentiles from turning to "another Hitler", they find they have imported millions of Muslims who are more than ready to slit their throats.
I repeat, all this has evolved parallel to but, I think, separate from the development of the European Union.
I am against Britain's involvement in European Union for much the same reason as the author of the article you sent:
> .......the States included in the EU are very different> one from another, and so the needs of a state are different> from the need of another one......."
Thanks again for sending me this article. I will forward it to a number of my contacts, together with my commentary.
PMSubject: I: Useless fightItalianiLIberi 2007 July 28th Useless fightby Ida Magli
We undertook to give the best possible information about this manifestation, but we want also to say with absolute clarity to our readers, that we are sure it will obtain nothing. There are so many and obvious reasons.
First of all the choice of Brussels.
This means that theorganizers did not understand which is the basic cause, indeed the only one, of the islamization of Europe.
The EU was made expressly for this purpose: let the ubiquitous Muslisms invade the West in the easiest way possible, occupying 20% of them in Sweden, 15% in Denmark, 30% in Great Britain and so forth.
So it's not hard to understand: if a territory is wanted to be flooded,first of all the dams are removed.That's what has been done: the physical , psychical and cultural dams were removed, erasing the borders throughthe states both for the people and the goods, erasing the monetary differences, choosing two official languages,english and french, the ones most known by the immigrates coming from Africa and Asia, almost all obviously muslims.
The so called "nationalism" was condemned like a serious moral and political sin, with the aim to steal to western peoples, creators of the national states, the only passion which could push them to defend from the invasion: the Fatherland.
The violence used by the governors to force their ownsubjects to this behavior has been described, on one hand,like a virtue of solidarity and duty towards the poors, onthe other, carelesses about the contradiction, like a systemto increase the european patrimony of money, market,competitiveness and low job-force, claiming like an absoluteDivinity the freedom of the exchanges, of the mixtures, of the"integrations".
This is the only, true motivation of that artifact called EU.
To steal to Europeans the real feel of the property, theperception about the right of possessing something, startingfrom the same territory where they live and for which theyhave fought and died so many times; consequently is builded aperception of not possessing national institutions, neithercurrency, or banks, or governors, or history, or ownreligion, to accustom the people to consider belonging tostrangers all that was thinked "European", includingobviously the right, the habits, the values, the religion.
If we do not become convinced about all this and about the necessity of each single State of taking immediately all theindispensable decisions to safeguard its own survival asa free nation, as a named territory belonging to its owncitizens who made its history, its beauty, its language, itsreligious tradition, any kind of protest against Brusselsis useless, even if worthy of the maximum respect.
Moreover the States included in the EU are very different one from another, and so the needs of a state are differentfrom the need of another one.Italy, just for its geographic conformation, its linguistical(the Church seems to have forgotten that "Latin" was madeby Romans), artistic and scientific history, for its excessivedemographic density and the brittleness of its territory,needs since today to refuse the "Schengen Pact", closing all its borders and telling loud to those people who are going tocome in Italy that will not admitted anybody more in.
Moreover Italy is also the seat of Vatican City and of the Pope(the chief of the Catholic Church).
This means that the nextbattle against Islam, will see Italy in the front line if she do not declared itself submitted to Islam will and betrayer of theChrist before it all happens; and this we must understand, also looking at the beahvior held by both the governors and the clergy.The silence of clergy is really impressive: to start speaking now, July 28th, as we have seen on some newspaper, would be ridiculous if only it was not so tragically painful.
Painful beacause it was all expectable easily since 15 years at least. The most serious and absolutely unforgivable blameof those persons who has responsabilities of government, including the same clergy, is to be not able in previewing theconsequences of their own decisions and also the incapacity ofthinking about the future of those citizens who entrusted themtheir own Country, the future of their sons, their own history,their own religion. Those persons lack the also minimal abilityof thinking and are completely unworthy of the name of"governor".
The West will become the South-East. To understand the processes of this becoming would have been the preliminarystudy that the supporters of the EU would have had to do.The fact that the European West, or better the northern culture, would have surely conquered the Southern-East, widening its territory, its market an the force of the Continent was an inconsiderate and surely losing idea feededby the politics-economists. Because, as it's obvious, is theAfro-Asian South-East that annexed the European North and not the contrary.
The West is often stopped to wonder why Ancient Egyptdisappeared, why disappeard the Etruscans or the Aztecs and the Mayans.
These are all useless questions like those which soon the historians will asking about the sudden vanishing of theEuropean culture.
They was not the conquests of the enemy armies, because these never succeed in destroyin a civilization, not even with mass exterminations. It was the lost of meaning caused by the conquest like it happened for the Roman Empire when there came the Christianity also with no weapons.
And now it's happening with the EU. The elimination of differences by the homologation of people so deeply various, will pushwith a quick twist to the abyss of the "no-meaning", and to the end of the western culture in its original shape - the european one - with the creation of an 1500 years old tribal and islamic culture.
It will be the end of Christianity religion, happy itself for its charity activities and finally free from that inexplicable and so difficult to imitate Figure which is just Jesus ofNazareth.
The modern Church reduced the Christianity at the charity activities, and it is the most banal and the less religious choice, but above all it envolved a great freedom of acting to a religion which does not cheat about the meaning of not being a religion: Islamism.