European Freedoms undermined by an Ultra-Liberal Fifth Column

When did having national pride, holding a strong justified opinion on equality and freedoms, practicing your religion (Christianity), identifying with your culture and seeking to preserve hard won freedoms evolve from being noble activities to frowned upon signs of potential ultra right-wing fascist tendencies.

For the sake of clarity the definition of a fifth column is any group of people who undermine a larger group — such as a nation or group of nations in an alliance (substitute the EU) — from within, usually in favour of an enemy group or nation. The activities of a fifth column can be overt or clandestine.

The Vacuous PC Pseudo-Ideology

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
In the case of current German and Swedish refugee policy they are overt and facilitated by the main stream media and a slavish adherence to the bonkers notions dictated by that non-specific vacuous pseudo-ideology that is referred to as “political correctness”. This misguided set of cobbled together directionless principles is code for “I have not got the strength of character to defend an opinion that upholds the traditions and beliefs of my community” or “I despise my own culture and wish to dilute it and eventually replace it with an external alien set of aggressive, contradictory and oppressive ideologies”.

PC slaves label opponents as “reactionaries” but if you define this as a person who holds political views that favour a return to the status quo ante, the previous political state of society, which they believe possessed characteristics (discipline, respect for authority, etc.) that are negatively absent from the contemporary status quo of a society – then it is a badge to be worn with pride.

Putting Minority Rights in Context

The most extreme treatment of minorities has been carried out by 20th and 21st-century dictatorships. The worst examples are those of totalitarian regimes that carried out genocide to eradicate unwanted groups in society. Ironically the main players in the most extreme of these events were the Germans, Russians and Turks during the Holocaust, the Purges and the Armenian Genocide respectively. All once again playing an active role in the facilitation and exacerbation of contemporary tragedies of a similar scale.

In the case of current #German and #Swedish #refugee policy they are overtly anti-European facilitated by the main…
Posted by TMG Corporate Services on Friday, January 8, 2016

The Holocaust perpetrated by Nazi Germany murdered six million Jews, one-third of the total world Jewish population, as well as a significant portion of the Roma (“Gypsy”) community. Homosexuals were also a targeted minority for extermination.

The Soviet Union, under Stalin, carried out mass executions and deportations of dozens of Caucasian and Central Asian ethnic groups; some now face extinction. More recently, the Russian Federation has waged a brutal war against its own republic of Chechnya, killing tens of thousands of civilians and displacing more than half the population.

In April 1915 the Ottoman government embarked upon the systematic decimation of its civilian Armenian population. The persecutions continued with varying intensity until 1923 when the Ottoman Empire ceased to exist and was replaced by the Republic of Turkey. The Armenian population of the Ottoman state was reported at about two million in 1915. An estimated one million had perished by 1918, while hundreds of thousands had become homeless and stateless refugees. By 1923 virtually the entire Armenian population of Anatolian Turkey had disappeared.

Other examples of mass killings of a minority by a dictatorship include the Nigerian campaign against Biafrans, the Hutu genocide of Tutsi in Rwanda, Saddam Hussein’s mass killing of Kurds and Shiites in Iraq, and the Sudanese government’s sponsorship of mass killing, raping, and deportation in Darfur. The project for an “ethnically pure” Greater Serbia undertaken by Slobodan Milosevic resulted in the murder of 200,000 Bosnian Muslims and 10,000 Albanian Muslims in Kosovo by a killing machine that was stopped only by military campaigns carried out by NATO.

The Tyranny of the Majority Reconsidered

Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in the “Tyranny of the Majority,” Chapter XV, Book 1, Democracy in America: “If it be admitted that a man possessing absolute power may misuse that power by wronging his adversaries, why should not a majority be liable to the same reproach? Men do not change their characters by uniting with one another; nor does their patience in the presence of obstacles increase with their strength. For my own part, I cannot believe it; the power to do everything, which I should refuse to one of my equals, I will never grant to any number of them.”

Democracy in its purest form requires minority rights equally as it does majority rule. As democracy was conceived, the minority’s rights must be protected no matter how singular or alienated that minority is from the majority society; otherwise, the majority’s rights lose their meaning – in theory.

These rights are considered the essential element of any liberal democracy. The British political philosopher John Stuart Mill took this principle further. In his essay On Liberty he wrote, “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community against his will is to prevent harm to others.”

The Tyranny of the Minority

Mill’s “no harm principle” aims to prevent government from becoming a vehicle for the “tyranny of the majority,” which he viewed as not just a political but also a social tyranny that stifled minority voices and imposed a regimentation of thought and values. Mill’s views became the basis for much of liberal political philosophy since, whether it is free market or economic liberalism or social liberalism.

The irony is that as we stand today in Europe the principle has been reversed as a social tyranny prevails that is implemented by elected governments that stifles majority voices and imposes an alien and contradictory set of undermining minority agendas.

Surely Frau Merkel your Salafi Wahhabi jihadi friends will be offended by this public display of such an offensive hand gesture.  

The German 20th Century Guilt Complex

The time line that explains how Europe has developed contradictory attitudes to “tolerance” that undermines its own people and favours external opportunists begins at the end of World War II. Europe and Europeans have a cultural and historical distinctiveness that sets them apart from other regions and in particular is entirely at odds with the alien cultures of the Middle East and Near Asia both politically, ideologically and spiritually.

Even the most uninformed are in some way aware that the cultures of Europe and the Middle East / Near Asia have been at loggerheads for millennia. The fact that Europe maintained an upper hand in recent centuries belies the uncomfortable truth that from the mid-500s to the mid-1500s Europe risked being overrun by various aggressively expansionist Islamic empires.

I will not do justice to the usual anti-Crusader rant that Islamic extremist apologists use to justify Islamic disgruntlement with Europe and Europeans. Suffice to say that those events were a direct response to incursions and threats from the Caliphate(s) at that time and have worn thin as any form of practical justification for any contemporary ideology that seeks to use these almost millennia old events to justify any current foreign or cultural policy.

The refugee crisis in Europe has been caused in many respects by the naive social policies of Germany and Sweden. After the events of the 20th century, Germany has since the 1940s, sought to “atone” for the atrocities and deprivations it imposed on most of Europe in the previous 50 years by seeking to demonstrate its alleged tolerance and openness.

The “lost post war generation” in Germany struggled with an identity crisis and a guilt complex and subsequently heavily subscribed to even the most misguided 60s civil rights movements, soviet infiltrated anti-nuclear campaigns, “believe in nothing” flower power nonsense and embraced and encouraged most all marginal and deviant groups that emerged then and since, under the guise of equality and multiculturalism.

Sweden’s Self-Serving Opportunism  

The “brave” Swedes who to their eternal shame – along with Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Andorra, Liechtenstein, Vatican City, San Marino and Switzerland held a neutral stance during World War II – breached the nation’s neutrality in favour of both Germany and the Western Allies when it became expedient.

During the German invasion of the Soviet Union, Sweden allowed the Wehrmacht to use Swedish railways to transport (June–July 1941) the German 163rd Infantry Division along with howitzers, tanks and anti-aircraft weapons and associated ammunition, from Norway to Finland. German soldiers traveling on leave between Norway and Germany were allowed passage through Sweden — the so-called “permittenttrafik”. Iron ore was sold to Germany throughout the war.

And for the Allies, Sweden shared military intelligence and helped to train soldiers made up of refugees from Denmark and Norway, to be used in the liberation of their home countries. It also allowed the Allies to use Swedish airbases between 1944 and 1945. In 1943, following an order to deport all of Denmark’s Jewish population to concentration camps, nearly all of Denmark’s 8,000 Jews were brought to safety in Sweden. Sweden also became a refuge for Norwegian Jews who fled from Nazi occupied Norway.

They now confuse the noble activity of becoming a refuge for anti-fascist and Jewish refugees from all over the region during that time with their current open door policy to Islamic economic migrants and other North African and Asian opportunists.

What the actions of Sweden during that time demonstrate about Swedish mentality is that they are incapable of holding a strong opinion – they are opportunists unlike the ruling classes in Germany who are simply determined to thrust Europe headlong once again into a crisis of their making.

Economic & Ideological Bullies

Not content with being the economic bully boy of the European Union the Germans now insist on foisting their twisted visions on the rest of Europe and in doing so undermine many of the principles that Europeans hold dear. Germany like Russia has always shown a propensity for authoritarianism and the psyche of the German nation is demonstrably schizophrenic as it flip flops from one extreme to another as everyone else picks up the tab for their ideological mis-adventures.

Migrant Crisis is putting whole of Europe in Danger
(This section is an excerpt taken entirely from an article in The Express 7th January 2016)

Countries such as Sweden and Germany that have taken in large numbers of migrants now have significantly more men than women. According to Dr Valerie Hudson this alone is a recipe for higher crime. But we cannot discount the fact that these migrants are also coming from an alien culture.

The dangers are already obvious. In Germany a wave of sex attacks over the New Year was perpetrated by migrants who showed no regard for their victims or the law. The threat is compounded by the possibility of jihadists using the crisis as a cover to sneak operatives into Europe. Even if only a tiny minority of the migrants identify with terrorist groups the risk is still unacceptably high.

There are still those labouring under the delusion that these people are refugees. They are not.

Historically when refugees have fled persecution they have overwhelmingly been women, children and the elderly. What we witnessed in 2015 – something which shows no sign of stopping in 2016 – was the mass movement of young men. These are migrants coming to Europe to further their own interests, not vulnerable people in need of sanctuary.

We owe them nothing. Europe’s leaders need to stop ushering in ever more of these new arrivals and start doing something about the problems caused by their obsession with open borders.

Paris police got it right Paris yesterday marked the first anniversary of the attacks on the offices of satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. A year on from those dreadful events Europe’s anti-terror forces are still on tenterhooks.

This was graphically demonstrated in the French capital as police shot dead a man who was wearing a fake suicide vest and soldiers were deployed on to the streets. The officers involved had little choice but to shoot to kill.

The officers involved had little choice but to shoot to kill. While his bomb may not have been real he was still waving a knife, shouting jihadist slogans and carrying an IS flag. As a spokeswoman for France’s interior ministry said: “The security forces showed true professionalism and vigilance.” The police must do everything in their power to keep the public safe.

Acknowledgements & References

1. John Stuart Mill. On Liberty, The Library of Liberal Arts edition, p.7. https://publius2013.wordpress.com/2012/05/31/tyranny-of-the-minority/
2. A Przeworski, JM Maravall, I NetLibrary Democracy and the Rule of Law (2003) p.223
3. John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, Vol. Three (London: 1788), p. 291.
4. Volk, Kyle G. (2014). Moral Minorities and the Making of American Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Friedrich Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human: First Sequel: Mixed Opinions and Maxims, 1879
6. Ayn Rand (1961), “Collectivized ‘Rights,'” The Virtue of Selfishness.
7. The Repressive Tolerance by Herbert Marcuse Jump up
8. Lani Guinier, The Tyranny of the Majority (Free Press: 1994)
9. Lacy K. Ford Jr., “Inventing the Concurrent Majority: Madison, Calhoun, and the Problem of Majoritarianism in American Political Thought”, The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 60, No. 1 (Feb., 1994), pp. 19–58 in JSTOR
10. University of Virginia
11. First Principles Journal
12. Democracy Web
13. Donald J. Maletz The Journal of Politics Vol. 64, No. 3 (Aug., 2002), pp. 741-763 Publish
14. Daily Express
15. CNN
16. BBC.com
17. Channel 4 Dispatches
18. Mail on Sunday
19. The Times
20. Vocativ
21. The IB Times
22. Business Insider
23. Newsweek
24. The Long War Journal
25. Defense One
26. The Washington Institute
27. Reuters
28. VICE News

Advertisements

Terrorist Hamas uses extreme violence but not to further the Palestinian cause or to defend Palestinians

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsI am vehemently anti-Hamas although not exclusively because they arm themselves and use violence. Every society past and present has used violence to defend itself and/or to protect its interests and will continue to do so. Some were/are “just” causes others were/are not. 

Violence is & always was an integral element of human nature

The type and scale of violence and the “standards” with respect to armed conflict that used to apply – in theory (a gentleman’s code if you will / Geneva Convention most recently) – have long since fell by the wayside. 

Violence is unsavoury in all its forms but Hamas’ use of violence and the methods of its equivalents (Radical Islamists) has passed all acceptable thresholds from as far back as the 1970’s. 

Hamas Hijacking: This time it’s the Palestinian Cause not an Airplane

Hamas claim that they use force to protect their “people” against oppression, occupation, injustice and persecution. This is simply not the case. This disconnect results in tacit and in some cases outright support in the West for the Palestinian cause “represented” by Hamas. However, Hamas has in fact hijacked the Palestinian cause to further an entirely different set of strategic goals. Many in the West who lend this support misunderstand or are taken in by the false propaganda that Hamas peddles to disguise the true objectives of its use of extreme violence and aggression. 

Western Audiences Rationalising the Unthinkable

People understand others based on their own experiences. When we approach a topic like suicide bombing which is alien to all right thinking people they ask: “Wow…what would it take to make me strap a bomb to my chest to blow up a bunch of innocent people in a neighbouring country?” 

Some would say that this type of barbarous activity could only be justified because of provocation of the most extreme kind that resulted in the death of family and friends, or intense humiliation, or pure desperation. The fact is no justification exists that could legitimise anyone committing such a dreadful act. 

The Role of Veneer Thin Analysis & Biased Media Reportage 

The Western media then showcases the actions of a large, modern, well-funded army (IDF) apparently crushing an underdog that is fighting with stones and light weapons. They publish pictures of bloodied children in Gaza, bombed out houses and dead civilians to generate the impression that these actions which they describe as atrocities or state sponsored terror fuel the response from Hamas. 


Extremism & Frames of Reference

Suicide bombing is extreme, but in the context of how the media report it some people see a kind of twisted rationale behind it. However, the public’s thinking short circuits when it comes to groups like Boko Haram and ISIS, which all view as barbarians. 

Every sane person draws a blank when asking themselves “What circumstances would it take for me to behead all the men in a neighbouring town, enslave the women, and rape them until they have my children?” They have no answer – they lack anything resembling a perspective that could comprehend this let alone justify it or support it. 

The Israelis as victims of Hamas, the Christians and Muslims of the Northern States of Nigeria as victims of Boko Haram and the Kurds as victims of ISIS and Turkish State Terror all understand the perspective they are dealing with. 

Hamas, Boko Haram and ISIS all use violence as a form of religious devotion justified by their twisted interpretation of a book that was written 1400 years ago and which they interpret to suit their agenda and to develop their charters. 

The key difference between Hamas and Boko Haram / ISIS is not its ideology, it is merely that Hamas’ military tends to lose more regularly and spectacularly and use that “underdog” being bullied by an aggressor (Israel) as the key ingredient in their propaganda and funding strategies.  

They share only one thing – they are murderous extremists who cannot be negotiated with and are entrenched in views which they will not compromise for the sake of peace because they feel their cause is divine. 

The West labels it all “extremism” without fully realising that in these societies for these people it is normality and indeed seen as a religious duty. 

The Actual Strategic Objectives of Hamas

Hamas’ goal with their use of violence is not peace nor is it the achievement of a two state solution and it most certainly is not the defence of the Palestinian people. 

The Hamas objective is the explicit destruction of the sovereign State of Israel, the elimination of all Jews – man, woman and child, and the purification of a land currently held by non-believing infidels – not just Jews but Christians, Hindu’s, Buddhists, minorities – all in fact who are not Radical Islamists. This is not conjecture. The following excerpts are from the Hamas founding charter:

On Hamas belief system: 
Allah is its goal, the Prophet its model, the Qur’an its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the case of Allah its most sublime belief.

On killing Jews (pre-amble):
Muslims will fight the Jews and kill them; until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!

On peace (article 13):
Peace initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement.

On Israel (article 28)
Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Muslims.

Read in full the published document: The Charter of the Hamas

Fostering A Culture of Violence and Hate 

From cradle to grave, Hamas and its predecessors have attempted to ingrain in their people a belief that the highest form of religious sacrifice is to commit violence and to give ones life for their “truths” as interpreted by them to suit their sinister agenda. Those who make that sacrifice are honoured in this world and the afterlife – by the governemnt. Streets are named after martyrs: PA names Ramallah street after Hamas terror mastermind 

Money is paid to their families as incentives rather than compensation: Documents: Saudis Paid Bombers’ FamiliesPalestinians get Saddam funds

The government has and continues to support this sacrifice by their citizens including their children who they encourage to become Shahid (witness or martyr): Arafat – “Dead Palestinian Children are the Greatest Message to the World”


Children are taught their role in the struggle: MEMRI: Hamas TV Children’s Show Encourages Killing of Jews. Palestinian children aspire to death as martyrs:

And some children play a more active role: Israel Says Children Enlist Children as Suicide Bombers – here a 14 year old suicide bomber:

Hamas possesses a entirely different mentality than Boko Haram or ISIS. Hamas many misinformed Westerners believe use violence to resist the Israeli “occupation” without realising that Hamas refers to the mere existence of Jews in Israel as an “occupation”. 

Bodies of dead and injured civilians are released and picked up globally by a liberal anti-Israeli media and attract audiences who do not understand that Hamas encourages and highlights these tragedies as a key weapon in their black propaganda efforts. 

An entire Hamas industry exists to stage powerful propaganda videos to elicit sympathy from the broader world. 

What really happens in Palestinian Media: Pallywood

This is an interesting “60 Minutes” segment about how the Palestinians use their own camera crews and actors to basically set up war scenes in their favour. Observers call it Pallywood:


Global sympathy elicited from pictures and videos of dead children are Hamas’ primary defence against the technologically stronger IDF. Sympathy is their primary source of funding from nations and individuals abroad; whether it be from those that are sympathetic to the goal of destroying Israel or those who are sympathetic to Palestinian suffering.

And the real Palestinians are suffering. Through the deprivation of their basic rights, through the stifling of their freedom to live differently, and through the constant state of war they find themselves in from both within and without – fostered by their “protectors” – Hamas.  

In summary, I do not disapprove of the use of violence to protect rights and preserve justice and oppose tyranny. But the Palestinians have a government that uses violence for far different reasons and not as a last resort – and rather than protecting free speech they stifle it, rather than uphold the rights of women to vote they suppress it, rather than encouraging new ideas to flourish they crush them, and instead of defending the Palestinian people they place them in harms way – for their own sake, for their twisted ideologies and for their personal enrichment.

The Noble (and Uber Wealthy) Man of the People

Yasser Arafat was the original head of the PLO, the mastermind behind the suicide bombing tactic, and the leader of the Palestinian PR strategy. Hamas has since taken control of Gaza, but they mention their close relationship with the PLO in their charter. 

Arafat was estimated by Forbes to have a net worth of US$300m at the time of his death, and a peak net worth of over US$1b; almost all of which was international aid and donations. His wife was well-known for her extravagant lifestyle in France, where she rented entire floors of luxury hotels and spent millions on high fashion: Why was €1m a month sent to Arafat’s wife?

Sixty Seconds to Show You What Hamas Does With Foreign Aid for its People



Acknowledgements:

First published Anonymously on Quora here.