Until the advent of materialism and 19th c. dogma, Western Civilisation was superior to anything Islam had developed. Islam has not aided in the development of the modern world; in fact civilisation has only been created in spite of Islam. Proof of this resides in the 'modern' world and the unending political-economic and spiritual poverty of Muslim states and regions. Squatting on richer civilisations is not 'progress'. Islam is pagan, totalitarian, and irrational.
If you are seeking muscular Christianity you need look no further than Tim Dieppe. In his new book, The Challenge of Islam, the head of policy at Christian Concern pulls no punches in confronting probably the greatest problem facing the Church and the country today.
This well-resourced book opens with a stream of statistics forensically illustrating just how rapidly Islam is growing as a social, cultural and political influence in today’s UK.
The statistics tell an alarming tale for our future as a society. At just under 4million in 2021, the Muslim population has grown by 44 per cent in a decade and now constitutes 6.5 per cent of the population. For the past six years Muhammed in its various spellings has been the most popular boys’ name. The average age of the UK population is 40 years whilst the average age of Muslims is 27 and the average age of Christians is 51. It is clear which way the tide is flowing.
The failure of multiculturalism leading to a dangerous lack of integration with its erosion of social cohesion and the rise in cultural tensions is made clear. As well as being harmful to Muslims themselves, holding back as it does the weakest in Islamic communities, the women and children, the lack of Muslim integration poses a significant danger to the wider society.
Worryingly, 3 per cent of Muslims say they support ISIS-style efforts to establish a caliphate. This may seem a small proportion but 3 per cent of 4million equates to 120,000 individuals. At a time when it is not physically possible to monitor all 40,000 known terrorist suspects, 24 per cent of Muslims say they would approve of violence in support of Islam.
There are 85 Sharia courts operating in the UK today, with their bias against women and non-Muslims, and 32 per cent of Muslims support the introduction of Sharia into British law. Nearly a third (31 per cent) think that a man should be allowed to have more than one wife.
The threat to our cherished freedoms inherent in the growth of the Muslim population is a real one. We are losing free speech when it comes to criticism of Islam or even critical examination of its regressive religious practices. Seventy-eight per cent of Muslims say there should be no freedom to publish pictures of Muhammed, while 87 per cent would deny us the freedom to make fun of their prophet. We should not forget the Batley Grammar School teacher who is still in hiding under threat of death for using pictures of Muhammed in a lesson.
This threat to free speech will become more draconian with the governing Labour Party promoting the All Party Parliamentary Group’s (APPG) flawed definition of Islamophobia. This definition has been supported by political parties and councils throughout Britain in an unthinking fit of eagerness to appear compassionate and progressive.
Islam is a religion and not a race, yet the APPG describes critical examination of Islam as a form of racism. This is no slip of the pen. It is so defined to get around Section 29J of the Public Order Act 1986. The Act prohibits racist speech but Section 29J, known as the Waddington Amendment, protects open critical religious discussion, proselytising and even the ridiculing of religion. If Islamophobia is defined as a form of cultural racism, critics of Islam will have no protection in law. As Dieppe reminds us, ‘Striking a Muslim is a crime, debating her religion is a right.’ That right must be defended.
Islam should not be accorded a privileged position in British society. If included in future legislation the APPG’s definition will become in effect a new blasphemy law, one rejected by every other religion in the UK. Most religions such as Christianity welcome open discussion; Islam does not. The APPG definition would also have a serious effect on anti-terror efforts which protect the public.
The Challenge of Islam looks at other aspects of Islam such as Islamic finance. Dieppe questions the oft-spoken claim that ‘Islam is a religion of peace’. He does not argue that most Muslims are not peaceful people. He does, however, make clear that its founder was not a man of peace, its history and spread is marked by violence and its teachings advocate suppression of other religions. There is a chapter on the deep anti-Semitism of Islam in its history and present actions. An ADL survey in 2019 found that 11 per cent of the UK population had anti-Semitic attitudes. Amongst Muslims the figure was 54 per cent.
Perhaps the most alarming aspect of this book is how it reveals the corrosive extent of fear amongst politicians and the media. There is a collective unwillingness to confront the problem and a readiness to cover up and apologise. Our establishment is even willing to sacrifice thousands of vulnerable young girls and women to Muslim rape gangs in order to preserve a non-existent community cohesion.
Dieppe not only criticises Islam, he gives ten pointers to a proper response. These include curbing the operation of Sharia courts, tightening up marriage visa rules, holding police accountable for treating all people equally under the law, robustly defending free speech and reducing overall levels of immigration.
This nation should be unashamedly identified as Christian. This does not mean a nation of Christians, rather accepting that our laws and culture are based on biblical teaching. Who we are as a people is bound up with Christianity; if we reject those ties we are no longer the people we once were and Britain is lost.
This book is important. As Dieppe says in his introduction, ‘At its root, this is a battle for the soul of the nation. It is a battle we cannot afford to lose.’ Christians cannot help but be anti-Islam, which is an utter negation of the Christian faith. That does not mean we should be anti-Muslim. As Dieppe says, ‘Muslims are redeemable, Islam is not.’ The only real antidote to radical Islam is radical Christianity.
Across the UK there have been multiple protests and violent clashes between normal UK born citizens, many of them White, and the authorities and the useless gestapo named the UK police force. Muslims, Blacks and non-Whites have been the targets. The fake news media, the usual cadre of cowardly boot licking multi-culturalist politicians, the un-civil service, have all viciously attacked and arrested many of the ‘White thugs’. They display of course a completely different set of standards for Muslims in Leeds, Birmingham, London and elsewhere, who can burn, loot, murder and destroy almost at will. No opprobrium or vitriol from the elite. No condemnation from the fake news and fake ‘experts'.
The UK has a real population of probably 75 million, not the false 67 million declared in the 2021 census. Of the 75 million, probably 1/3 are non-White mostly Black, Muslim and Indian immigrants, asylum seekers, illegals. In the past 10 years roughly 1 million ‘immigrants’ have landed in the UK both legally and illegally, or roughly 10 million in a decade. London is majority non-White, as is Birmingham and many famous cities notable for their prominence during the Victorian era and industrialisation including Leicester, Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield and Nottingham. Many of us who travel within the UK have noted this.
In short, the UK has been turned upside by immigration. The entire national fabric including its Christian heritage, past and legacy are being systemically annihilated. All by plan. The EU or German Empire project was always a political endeavour to eradicate the nation state and have a regional and eventually a global hegemony. When Brexit occurred, the elite did everything possible to reverse that outcome and part of the globalist response was to open wide the borders. Brexit was largely a vote to seal the borders and reclaim national sovereignty. When this did not happen, the elite simply seeded a massive national grievance into the majority White population. As Enoch Powell stated 60 years ago, the Rivers of Blood, are flowing and have been for 20 years.
Within the UK we have:
· Probably 10 million Muslims, doubling every decade. By 2040 the northern English cities and London will be majority Muslim.
· By 2040, the Muslim population in the UK will be 40-45% of the total UK population.
· From 1 or 2 mosques in 1970, we now have over 2.000.
· Muslims and their allies dominate local, regional and national governments, institutions and organisations.
· Half a dozen major cities have Muslim mayors including the execrably racist Jihadist Khan in London.
· 1 million white working-class girls have been raped since 1980 in the UK by Muslims.
· 70% of Muslims do not officially work in London.
· Jews are on the record that they don’t feel safe in London or other cities dominated by Muslims.
· Crime is at record levels across the UK, due to immigration.
· Cost of living and house prices are at ridiculous levels in part due to open borders.
When a Black teenager carves up 3 White girls at a Taylor Swift party, it creates a trigger. It matters not that he was born in the UK. The valid reaction is that he and his family should never have been in the UK in the first place, with his parents arriving as ‘refugees’. The gratitude shown to the UK from a Black born here, from 'refugee parents', is to murder young White girls. This is an act of racism. Why didn’t he kill 3 Black girls?
This atrocity is just the latest in a long list of crimes committed by ‘immigrants’ or their offspring against the natives. The open borders invasion is simply that – an invasion, part of the Great Replacement of White English. In the upside-down clown world that is the UK and its anti-reality ‘culture’ the victims are to be blamed and anyone protesting the absolute evisceration of England, including its history, culture, heritage and Christian roots, is of course, a Nazi, Fascist, Racist and Phobe. This is why there will be a civil war in the UK and rivers of blood.
Could the Dutch lead a restoration of Europe? 'Far Right' is an appellation given by the brain dead and ignorant. Anything that is not dystopian, fascist or communal is now 'far right'.
(source)
After six months of negotiations that seemed foredoomed to failure, The Netherlands will have a new government that will attempt to do something novel and strange in Europe (and North America): it’s going to put its own people first. In a development that has implications far beyond the Netherlands, populist politician Geert Wilders, whose party became the country’s largest in last November’s elections, has reached an agreement with three other parties on the right to form a new government. Wilders won’t be prime minister, but his tough anti-mass migration agenda will be implemented. Or at least that’s the plan.
Breitbart reported Thursday that the Netherlands “will finally get the right wing government its people voted for, and some of the toughest border control in the Western World.” Wilders himself was ebullient, saying: “The sun will shine again in the Netherlands… The Netherlands will be ours again.” Will Wilders manage to Make the Netherlands Great Again? That is certainly the goal of the provisional agreement he and his coalition partners have hammered out.
The agreement, which is entitled “Hope, Courage, and Pride,” stipulates that Wilders will not be prime minister, despite being the leader of the country’s largest party. This was a concession that was necessary in order to form a coalition at all, and it could mean that the whole thing could go down in flames.
But maybe not: in theory, the prime minister won’t be an ideologue opposed to the coalition’s program but someone who understands that his or her job is to implement that program. “It appears,” says Breitbart, that “the ministry positions and Prime Ministership will be held by ‘technocrats’ — non-politicians and typically academics and economists — who would implement the government programme as dictated by the four.”
Could this work? Could it actually result in an effective government? It has about as much chance of doing so as a hereditary monarchy or the rule of the majority, both of which have produced some great governments and some disastrous ones, so it’s worth a try.
Meanwhile, the agreement is audacious in scope, aiming at doing nothing less than reversing the Netherlands’ slow and steady Islamization; if successful, this could transform the entire trajectory of Europe as a whole. The agreement states that “concrete steps are being taken towards the strictest admission regime for asylum and the most comprehensive package to control migration ever. The entire asylum and migration system is being reformed.”
Read the rest here.