Yesterday is the New Tomorrow

Location: London, United Kingdom

Monday, March 27, 2006

Rule Britannia

Reading the Court reports about the abduction and killing of Mary-Ann Leneghan, by six men in Reading after being held in a hotel and then subjected to a horrific ordeal makes deeply depressing reading, but it is just the latest in a long, long list of very sorry tales chronicling the sad and pathetic decline of this country.
That these six people have got such low regard for human life suggests that there is something seriously wrong with this country’s ugly underbelly (which is growing bigger and uglier everyday).
This is certainly worth reading:

Saturday, March 11, 2006

The Constitution is back....

After the Titanic hit the iceberg back in 1912 it took a while before the Captain, Officers, crew and passengers realised that they were done for. The first to realise that the ship was going down were the passengers below deck in Third Class.
The same is true for Europe today.
While the indigenous lower classes have – in a panic, but rationally – begun to vote in ever growing numbers (although regrettably still too few in the UK) for so-called populist, "islamophobe" politicians, the European establishment politicians and mainstream media are discussing how to revive the European Constitution which the voters in France and the Netherlands rejected last year. Instead of focussing on the much more important task of trying to prevent an impending and imminent clash of cultures, the establishment politicians are totally absorbed in efforts to circumvent the rejection of their constitutional project.
The assassinations of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh, the bombings in Madrid and London, the French riots, the Danish cartoon case, should represent the best collection of warnings to even the blindest establishment, but all Europe's politicians care about is that when Europe goes down it goes down with a constitution. Europe's current predicament has two causes. A self-inflicted "demographic winter" is setting in on the continent. Last week the Finance committee of the French Assembly wrote that by 2030 Europe will represent only 8% of the world's population, compared with 22% in 1950. Within the same period the average age of its citizens will rise from 29 to 39 years and the fertility rate will drop from 2.6 to 1.4. The situation is particularly serious in Germany, Italy and Spain. These dramatic figures are all the more worrying as they take into account the large immigrant population that has settled Europe since the 1960s and '70s. In the midst of its demographic implosion Europe invited in large numbers of fecund people belonging to an alien culture and religion. This in itself was asking for problems - I think that Enoch Powell referred to this potentially causing some trouble. The latter were exacerbated by the second cause of Europe's predicament: the refusal of Europe's ruling liberal elites to uphold law and order and to defend its traditional values (rooted in Christianity) and institutions, such as the nation-state. It is this combination of "lazy multiculturalism and corroded civil society" that is killing Europe. The EU Constitution is an example of the corrosion of one of the most important of Western institutions, the Nation State. But Europe's politicians, including its new leaders, fail to notice and are actually exacerbating the situation. Last week it was revealed that German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who never made a secret of her desire to revive the European constitutional treaty, along with the cunning French president Jacques Chirac, have devised a Franco-German plan to present the core of the EU Constitution to the French and Dutch voters again. This is their plan: The rejected constitutional treaty would be reduced to its first two parts, that which sets out the EU's competences and the charter of fundamental rights of the union. A political declaration would be added and the new document would be put to a fresh poll in both France and the Netherlands. The remaining third part of the text, detailing the EU's policies, would subsequently be ratified by the French and Dutch parliaments, thus completing the ratification of the entire EU Constitution. Europe's leaders would be required to sign a declaration on the "social dimension of Europe" in order to soothe the fears of Socialist voters that the EU will liberalize the economy (the one good bit of the proposal). The Franco-German plot seems already to have met with the approval of Belgium, which throughout its 175-year history has always been a French lackey (apart from the short periods when it went to bed with Germany). Belgium's Prime Minister is an outspoken proponent of a federal European superstate, a "United States of Europe," which will in effect be a 'Greater Belgium'. Last week the Prime Ministers of Finland and Portugal also called for a European Constitution based on the existing draft. Earlier the Spanish Foreign Minister, made it clear that Spain also wants the Constitution implemented. Another crafty old Frenchman, former President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, also wants a revival of the rejected Constitution. He said the other day that Europe will have to "correct" the fact that it was rejected by two countries.... "The Constitution will have to be given a second chance," wanged on Mr Giscard because apparently the electorate had voted no out of an "error of judgement" and "ignorance." He stressed that Europe's leaders would not be stopped by the people: "In the end, the text will be adopted." He also predicted that the Constitution would be a stepping stone to further integration later and that the Constitution is for this generation, but for the next generation "there will be something else". Alas I fear that our children will not be living under a new constitution but by then the shit will truly have hit the fan and the last thing on the mind of young indigenous Europeans will be the constitution but a Europe-wide replay of the Balkans in the 90's.
Merkel's motivation to play ball with the other Eurocretins is partly because Germany's deficit next year will fall outside the rules laid down by, er, yes...Germany in the 1990s. Last year it pressured the EU to relax them because it can no longer comply with them. It's the same sort of behaviour that Val d'E is showing over the consitution. "We make ze rules, we break ze rules". The only bit of good news is that Sarkozy, the French interior minister and presidential hopeful, is reluctant to put the Constitution to the voters a second time. He would prefer to adopt only those proposals of the rejected treaty which enjoy a "large consensus." This cherry-picking approach is designed to lead to a "Diet Constitution". One of the cherries that Mr Sarkozy wants to pick includes increased checks against over-regulation by national parliaments. "Over regulation by national parliaments" - is he having a laugh?! The EU invented the concept. He is on tour right now across the EU trying to flog his idea of a "mini constitutional treaty" (and also to enhance his international prestige for the 2007 French presidential elections by showing how popular he is with the other leaders - how this will turn on the French voters I don't know - they hate foreigners). A recent survey conducted among the Brussels establishment of Eurocrats – EU politicians, journalists, lobbyists, NGOs and bureaucrats – shows widespread support for constitutional cherry-picking. Of those questioned in the survey 70% believed that a "Constitution lite" would be just the ticket. No great surprise that Euro-Civil-Servants are in favour of it - they wouldn't survive in the real world - they need their cushy, pen-pushing jobs.
However, there are also "hardliners" who insist that the Constitution is dead since the French and the Dutch rejected it. Outspoken proponents of this position are Poland and the Netherlands. Both countries seem to be inately sceptical of the project but never seem to come out and really say why they are. The Dutch you can understand, firstly they have already rejected it and secondly, as I have said before, they know full well what is around the corner (Fortuyn & Van Gogh for starters) and they are pretty sure that the EU will be no defence against that threat. The Polish President opined "The old constitution created a certain hybrid, which was not a European superstate yet, but was not that far from it", but failed to clarify what the Poles didn't like about it - a bit too German I would guess.
Whether we get Constitution lite or the Full Monty completely misses the point. It is not whether we are joined up or not that really matters, but what it is that we would stand for if we were together. The far right parties & peoples of Europe will have to decide whether to try and shape a continent by strengthening the links to its past or sleepwalk into a multiculti car crash. The Euro liberal elite are carrying out a sort of grand ideological coup d'etat and the constitution is a significant tool in achieving it. As a result, the day when a proper coup is executed in some European country moves ever closer.

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Jean Charles de Menezes

Can we please desist from discussing this tiresome subject from now on.
He was an illegal immigrant.
The fact is that if he had not been part of the London black labour market, he might have been known to the Police, Local Council, Tax Office etc and therefore not mistaken for some crazed muslim. Obviously being shot for just holding illegal guest-worker status is just a bit harsh, but I think we all accept that the Police made an honest mistake (I suspect that the Army intelligence unit and the Police didn’t liaise as well as they could have). But as they say in war, ‘shit happens’.
It is right and proper that there is a shoot to kill provision for the Police in the UK (it should sit alongside a new internment policy) until we have managed to correct some of the malaise that has taken a stranglehold in this once great country.


I’m in Peking today and have just read an article in the China Daily about some of our muslim friends over here. Yet again we have an example of their refusal to integrate.
Their values are seemingly at odds with just about every other culture.
Tie Yongxiang, a muslim from Gansu Province in a remote part of China, has never seen an aeroplane or watched television. In fact, when asked if he had heard of China said, "I know what China is, it is a country run by people who are supposed to be helping us." You can already see a bit of an attitude problem here….
"Us," as he puts it, are the Dongxiang people, an muslim ethnic group that has lived for eight centuries in Gansu Province. Of the 25 townships in the county, 19 do not have a single Chinese resident. Most people do not speak Chinese, and some, like Tie, have only a vague notion of China, even though they live in the middle of it. The geographic isolation has helped preserve a devout Islamic culture and an ancient language, but it has also separated the Dongxiang people from the prosperity lifting other parts of China.
The Dongxiang, one of China's 56 officially recognized ethnic minorities, are now among China's poorest and most illiterate people. Ring any bells?
Though some of the population are too poor to send their children to school, they have (surprise, surprise) pooled enough money to build village mosques and graceful towers with elegant curved roofs that serve as burial vaults. "The Dongxiang people have always believed in Islam," said Ma Ali, 36, the imam at an old mosque in Hanzilin village. Indeed, even within a larger region known as the center of Islam in China, Dongxiang has a reputation for being particularly devout. However, the Islamic atmosphere has become watered down over time, and so now the older people want to protect their culture, and particularly Islam. "A lot of young people really want to go out and see the rest of China," a younger resident said, "But often their families don't let them. It's still very, very isolated."
The distinctive local language is a source of pride. But it is also blamed for Dongxiang's educational shortcomings. The language is oral, so children never learn to read or write in their native tongue. In grammar school, the curriculum is in Chinese and therefore many children drop out. Government statistics show that the average person in Dongxiang attends just 1.1 years of schooling. Because of the cost, or so they say, many families never send their children to school at all, and particularly daughters.
But they can build those mosques.

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Trust Your Instinct

One of the most gratifying side effects of the escalation of religious, cultural, national & racial tensions is the fact that those who would have kept their mouths shut for fear of upsetting the liberal ‘elite’ (just think Cherry Blair) seem to be more willing to stick their head above the parapet. These folks are not making slanderous remarks, or casting aspersions generally but are getting down to publishing some high grade, sensitive data.
I can’t find a record of the story in the British papers, but the International Herald Tribune has printed an article about genetic research carried out among three groups: Africans, East Asians and Europeans. The research was published in October last year but now it seems is the right time to talk about this sort of thing….
The staggering conclusion is that the human race is still evolving (Cherry and her gang have claimed that this sort of nonsense stopped 10,000 years ago). Indeed, the project leader, Jonathan Pritchard of the University of Chicago stated, “There is ample evidence that selection has been a major driving point in our evolution during the last 10,000 years, and there is no reason to suppose that it has stopped".
The researchers' data is based on DNA changes in three populations gathered by the HapMap project, a venture that built on the decoding of the human genome in 2003. The authors have found many regions where selection seemed to have occurred.
The selected genes detected fall into a handful of functional categories, as might be expected if people were adapting to specific changes in their environment. Some are genes involved in digesting foods, like the lactose-digesting gene common in Europeans. Some are genes that mediate taste and smell as well as detoxify plant poisons, perhaps signaling a shift in diet from wild foods to domesticated plants and animals.
Pritchard estimates that the average era at which the selected genes started to become more common under the pressure of natural selection is 10,800 years ago in the African population and 6,600 years ago in the Asian and European populations.
Anthropologists had assumed that the first modern humans to arrive in Europe about 45,000 years ago had the dark skin of their African origins, but soon acquired the paler skin needed to admit sunlight for vitamin D synthesis.
The finding of five skin genes selected 6,600 years ago could imply that Europeans acquired their pale skin much more recently.
Pritchard also detected selection at work in brain genes, including a group known as microcephaly genes because, when disrupted, they cause people to be born with unusually small brains.

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

The Netherlands – The Canary in the Coal Mine

The recent stories from Holland should be noted by her allies. Where Holland has gone, Britain and the rest of Europe are following. The silencing happens bit by bit. A student paper in Britain that ran the Danish cartoons got pulped. A London magazine withdrew the cartoons from its website after the British police informed the editor they could not protect him, his staff, or his offices from attack. This happened only days before the police provided 500 officers to protect a muslim protest in Trafalgar Square.
It seems the British police — who regularly provide protection for mosques (as they did after the 7/7 bombs) — were unable to send even one policeman to protect an organ of free speech. At the London protests, islamists were allowed to incite murder and bloodshed on the streets, but a passer-by objecting to these displays was threatened with detention for making trouble.
Holland (with its disproportionately high muslim population) - Its once open society is closing, and Europe is closing slowly behind it. It looks, from Holland, like the twilight of liberalism — not the “liberalism” that is actually libertarianism, but the liberalism that is freedom. Not least freedom of expression.
All across Europe, debate on islam is being stopped. Italy’s greatest living writer, Oriana Fallaci, soon comes up for trial in her home country, and in Britain the government seems intent on pushing through laws that would make truths about islam and the conduct of its followers impossible to voice.
Those who write and talk about islam thus get caught between those on our own side who are increasingly keen to prosecute and increasing numbers of militants threatening murder. In this situation, not only is free speech being shut down, but our nation’s security is being compromised.
Since the assassinations of Pim Fortuyn and, in 2004, the film maker Theo van Gogh, numerous public figures in Holland have received death threats and routine intimidation. The heroic Somali-born Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali and her equally outspoken colleague Geert Wilders live under constant police protection, often forced to sleep on army bases. Even university professors are under protection.
Europe appears to be shuffling into darkness. It is proving incapable of standing up to its enemies, and in an effort to accommodate the peripheral rights of a minority is failing to protect the most basic rights of its own people.
The governments of Europe have been tricked into believing that criticism of a belief is the same thing as criticism of a race. So it is becoming increasingly difficult and dangerous to criticise a growing and powerful ideology within our midst. It may soon, in addition, be made illegal. The recent Bill passed through the House of Commons is such a fudge that one can’t tell one way or the other – Nevertheless it is a step closer to a situation where even the most intolerant must be tolerated.
But all is not doom and gloom, there are small but meaningful signs that things may change for the better. Dutch Integration Minister Rita Verdonk, one of several top politicians under death threats from Islamists, plans courses for imams to train in citizenship and Western values. She demonstrated what that might mean in front of press cameras in January, telling an imam who refused to shake her hand because of "religious rules" that he had better learn Western customs. "Next year I expect to speak to you in Dutch," she said through an interpreter. Dutch borders have been virtually shut. New immigration is down to a trickle. The great port city of Rotterdam just published a code of conduct requiring Dutch be spoken in public. Parliament recently legislated a countrywide ban on wearing the burqa in public. Listen to a prominent Dutch establishment figure describe the new Dutch Way with immigrants. "We demand a new social contract," says Jan Wolter Wabeke, a High Court Judge in The Hague. "We no longer accept that people don't learn our language, we require that they send their daughters to school, and we demand they stop bringing in young brides from the desert and locking them up in third-floor apartments."It seems that the Dutch are once again at the forefront of changes in Europe. This time, the Dutch model for Europe is one of multiculturalism besieged, if not in the dustbin of history where it belongs.
What can explain Europe's unusually (and frankly unexpected) robust reaction to the cartoon crisis, which continued last week with riots in Nigeria and Pakistan that have left over 100 dead. There were apologies for causing offense after a small Danish paper published a dozen cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. But on one point European leaders were united and bluntly clear: they would not tolerate any limits on European newspapers' rights to publish. Denmark's Minister of Cultural Affairs Brian Mikkelsen said, "We have gone to war against the multicultural ideology that says that everything is equally valid." These days, he speaks for most Europeans. Danes, and Dutch, and a few other countries might be well on their way to creating multiethnic societies. But make no mistake: they're no longer willing to tolerate a European melting pot—a broadly multicultural society—where different cultures live by widely different norms.
Nicolas Sarkozy, the French interior minister said "The French way of integration no longer works," meaning France's long-held pretense that its strict public secularism could erase differences and make newcomers "French." – Where on earth was the logic in that? Thus Sarkozy unveiled a new immigration law earlier this month, a virtual copy of the Dutch regulations. Sarkozy plans to introduce highly selective immigration, testing for the "assimilability" of those it admits. A new "contract of welcome and integration" stipulates learning French and looking for a job in return for 10-year residence permits and discrimination protections. Immigrants failing to respect basic Western values face deportation. Let us see if they really live up to this, or better still deal with the problem once and for all.
If Europeans aim to build multiethnic societies that play by their rules, they'll also have to get their heads around the fact that this new world will be multireligious, too—a fact that poses awkward challenges. Over some of Europe, for example, established Christian churches enjoy special state privileges and subsidies [i.e no "separation of church and state"]. The continent will need to decide whether they would like to re-establish the moral code laid down by the Church (it isn’t too late) or abolish the ‘double standards’ and establish a new equality.
Europe's new immigrant related toughness will feel like forced integration to some – no great surprise there. "It's a form of creating a second-class citizenship," says Tariq Modood, director of the Centre for the Study of Ethnicity and Citizenship in Bristol. "All the burden of change is placed on the immigrant." Unbloodybelievable.