Illegitimate Transfer of Inalienable European Rights via Convention(s) & Supranational Bodies Establishment of Sovereignty-Usurping Supranational Body Dictatorships Enduring Program of DEMOGRAPHICS WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of PSYCHOLOGICAL WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of European Displacement, Dismemberment, Dispossession, & Dissolution
No wars or conditions abroad (& no domestic or global economic pretexts) justify government policy facilitating the invasion of ancestral European homelands, the rape of European women, the destruction of European societies, & the genocide of Europeans.
U.S. RULING OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR TO SALVAGE HEGEMONY [LINK | Article]
Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? —Who wants to make free people free?
Why Arab States won’t take in Syrian refugees
Mohammad Ahmad 12:53 p.m. CDT October 7, 2015
Greece Migrants_Fran
The discovery of 3-year-old Aylan Kurdi‘s body on a Turkish beach on Sept. 2 pricked the conscience of the world. Everyone wants to do something.
However, many people are perplexed that the Arab states, despite their geographical proximity, historical links and shared religion and language with Syrian refugees, are not making any significant contribution to the resettlement of those refugees in their lands.
Arabs share this surprise. They can’t understand this inaction when a quarter of a century ago, thousands of Kuwaitis were given refuge in the Gulf after the Iraqi invasion. They have expressed their dismay over the situation on social media. On Twitter, the Arabic hashtag that translates to #WelcomingSyrianRefugeesIsaGulfduty has provided them a place for expressing the indignation many Arabs feel when they witness European states such as Germany and Britain taking in thousands of refugees while their governments sit idle.
A recent post expresses the distress: It shows a photo of a drowned refugee with the comment: “It is shameful that they have to roam all about God’s earth and drown in the seas while fleeing death when we are supposed to be closer to them than the West.”
In the meantime, Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan share the bulk of the 4.1 million Syrian refugees who have fled a civil war that has killed more than 250,000 and displaced more than 7 million. The wealthiest Arab countries have formally taken in no Syrian refugees, arguing that doing so would open them up to the risk of terrorism.
To placate citizens who feel compassion for the Syrian refugees, Arab governments point to the money they have given to help Syrian refugees. Qatar, United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait have been among the world’s largest donors to Syrian refugees, via United Nations agencies and private charities.
While aid through the U.N. and its agencies is verifiable, the portion given through private charities is not. While Kuwait has provided $784 million through the U.N. since 2012 and the UAE more than $350 million, these amounts are still less than the almost $800 million from Britain or the $3 billion the U.S. has provided.
The Arab states’ argument about the risk of terrorists entering their lands is lame. Any significant movement has been in the reverse direction. The Syrian resistance has had the tactical support of the Arab states, which share the resistance leaders’ doctrinal agenda. These pseudo-Islamist leaders have little interest in destabilizing the Arab States that are funding them, especially when their most important immediate goal is a victory in Syria. The threat of state-sponsored terrorism by Syria’s Assad government is also far-fetched since Syria’s ruler has his hands full fighting for his survival.
The real reason for this inhuman blocking of Syrian refugees is different. The Syrians have lived under secular governments far too long for the comfort of the Arab states. While Syrian rulers may have been undemocratic, they did protect religious freedom for most groups. As a result, many Syrians accept religious plurality and are more inclusive than exclusive. This does not fit in with the doctrinal rigidity of the ruling Arab elite.
That the Syrians share a common language makes them dangerous in the eyes of some Arab rulers. They fear that refugees could dangerously pollute the minds of subjects who are kept under strict religious monitoring although even the Quran says, “Admonish thou then; thou art but an admonisher. Thou art not over them a warden.”
Additionally, figures in some of these Arab states have made inflammatory statements about Syrian refugees, many of whom are Alawites, Christians or Druze. Given how things operate in these states, it is difficult to assume that these have been made in contradiction to government policies.
A sermon delivered by the pseudo-Islamist Saudi cleric Sa’ad Ateeq al Ateeq in Doha’s state-controlled Grand Mosque called for the destruction of the faithful of other religions: “Allah, strengthen Islam and the Muslims, and destroy your enemies, the enemies of the religion,” he said. The preacher went on to say, “Allah, destroy the Jews and whoever made them Jews, and destroy the Christians and Alawites and the Shiites.” Not long ago, Saudi Arabia’s highest Islamic authority, Sheikh Abdul Aziz Bin Abdullah, called for the destruction of “all the churches in the (Arabian peninsula).” Such sentiments from the pulpit by quasi-official figures provide a good insight into the mindset of Arab rulers. In that light, their decision to block the entry of Syrian refugees makes perfect sense.
This refusal by the Saudi-led Arab States to bar Syrian refugees hasn’t just resulted in misery to hundreds of thousands of people. It also has provided an opportunity to Christian-majority states to again help Muslims in dire need. In the seventh century, early Muslim refugees also were helped by the Christian kingdom of Aksum, present-day Ethiopia and Eritrea (formerly referred to as Abyssinia). This act of kindness is remembered by all Muslims with extreme thankfulness. Pope Francis’ guidance to his flock regarding Syrian refugees — “Every Catholic parish, every religious community, every monastery, every sanctuary in Europe should accommodate one family, beginning with my diocese of Rome” — reminds one of that kind, long-ago gesture by the Christian king of Abyssinia.
The pseudo-Islamist extremists have been trying to portray humanity’s war against terrorism as a clash of civilizations and religions. Humane treatment of the Syrian refugees would go a long way in countering their propaganda. The best-case scenario would be for Israel, which borders Syria, to open its borders to the refugees. While this is probably too much to hope for, it would be a death blow to the extremists. Is Israel prepared to take this giant leap to befriend Muslims?
Mohammad Ahmad is a director of a company in Lahore, Pakistan.
Islam in Ethiopia dates back to the founding of the religion; in 615, when a group of Muslims were counseled by Muhammad to escape persecution in Mecca and travel to Ethiopia via modern-day Eritrea, which was ruled by Ashama ibn Abjar, a pious Christian king.
According to the most recent 2007 CSA governmental data, Muslims are 33.9% of the population.
United States Department of State indicates that 50% of the population are Sunni Muslims but gives no figures for Shias, while a 2009 Pew Research Center report says that less than 1% are Shia.
Islam accounts for approximately 36% to 50% of the population.
More than 99% of Eritrean Muslims practice Sunni Islam.
Islam first arrived to the region when immigrants from Mecca, persecuted by the ruling Quraysh tribe were accepted into Abyssinia by the ruler of Ethiopia whom Arabic tradition has named Aṣḥama ibn Abjar, and he settled them in Negash, located in the Tigray Region of Ethiopia.
Islam later spread in Eritrea under the Ottoman Empire.
Thought this article was interesting, as it provides a bit of an overview of the Syrian and the Arab scenarios.
As the author points out, it's the Saudi Arabians that are funding the terrorists. So the argument that they're protecting themselves by denying Syrians asylum on ground that they're shutting out terrorists doesn't wash, when they themselves are sponsors of terrorism.
It's also worth bearing in mind that the 'Syrian refugees' everyone's referring to aren't strictly 'Syrian' refugees -- they're immigrants from all over the Middle East and Africa that are migrating to Europe.
Doha is in Qatar, where preachers at the state-controlled mosque call for the destruction of Jews and Christians (and others).
Saudi Arabia's highest religious authority, calls for the destruction of all churches in the Arabian Peninsula.
Meanwhile, Europe has had its borders open to Muslim immigration for decades and most European major cities are now mosque sites.
From a quick look, it appears that the construction of mosques has been funded in Europe by the Saudi Arabian fundamentalists, by Qatar and by Turkey, while Europe has bent over backwards to accommodate what amounts to foreign, non-secular invasion, that lives in parallel, religious dominated, and often violent and insular communities, that even police and emergency vehicles don't enter without backup.
Europe and the West, which has opened its borders to immigration that (a) cannot be assimilated and (b) immigration that represents an ongoing threat; subjects domestic populations to totalitarian surveillance and life under high terror alert, even as Europe fails to protect its populations from internal chaos and violence that is integral to hosting these outsider communities.
At the same time, Europe and the West continue to ally themselves with fundamentalist regimes that fund the Islamisation of Europe, regimes whose clerics call for destruction of Christians and churches.
Europe and the West meanwhile continue to take part in destabilisation and destruction of secular Middle Eastern targets of direct, or proxy, Western intervention (at a staggering financial and social cost to European and Western taxpayers), displacing millions in the Middle East and in Africa, and generating floods of unassimilable non-European immigrants, headed to Europe and the West.
This must be the definition of insanity.
That the US has spent $3 billion (since 2012) on post-intervention humanitarian mop-up operations in the guise of 'humanitarian' relief channelled through the UN (while America's own citizens live below the poverty line, America's water infrastructure crumbles & private companies rip off the American poor - here) indicates this is about American corporate imperialism and that Europe is absorbing the human costs for its American ally: costs that will destroy Europe, in sacrifice to the expansion of the American capitalist empire.
What one allows into a nation does not remain static. Sooner or later what is foreign increases in number and in demand for political power. In the case for people for whom the religious and the political is often one and the same, there can only be problems ahead.
I'd wager that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and other Islamic nations are also funding the current diverse and highly organised tsunami of Muslim immigration to Europe.
While there's a number of extraneous reasons the Arab states may ostensibly be reluctant to take in Syrians, the bulk of immigration to Europe is not Syrian.
Gulf Arab states and like Muslim counterparts have no interest in absorbing the tidal wave of Muslim immigration because their primary motivation and goal is Muslim domination. Hence Saudi offers of 200 mosques for every 100 refugees to Germany - here.
The Syrian refugees are just a small fraction of the onslaught of Middle Eastern and African immigration.
Four out of five migrants are NOT from Syria: EU figures expose the 'lie' that the majority of refugees are fleeing war zone
*An 'Islamist' is an Islamist. There's no such thing as a pseudo-Islamist (referred to above), although it's convenient to create the impression that there is, for political reasons.
Last Updated: Tuesday, 18 July 2006, 11:24 GMT 12:24 UK
Athens Muslims to get a mosque
By Andrew Burroughs
BBC News, Athens
Ottoman mosque turned into museum
This Ottoman era mosque is now a museum
Plans for the first mosque in Athens since Turkish rule under the Ottoman empire have been given the go-ahead by the Greek parliament.
Over recent yearsimmigration has brought hundreds of thousands of Muslims to the Greek capital.
But while freedom of worship is guaranteed by Greece's constitution as a member of the European Union, proposals for a new mosque have proved controversial in a country whose population is 96% Greek Orthodox.
There are mosques dating from Ottoman times in the old part of Athens known as Plaka. The Fethiye or victory mosque dates back to 1458. But today these buildings are for tourists not for Muslim prayers. One is now a museum of Greek folk art.
Athens is the only EU capital without a purpose-built place of worship for its Muslim population.
The city's 200,000 or so Muslims have been meeting in disused basements and whatever space the community can find.
Technically these buildings lack proper legal permission to function as places of worship, though the city authorities, aware of the problem, have allowed meetings to continue while a solution is sought.
Demonstrations
In the run-up to the Olympics, and under pressure to portray Greece as internationalist and conciliatory, the then socialist government chose a site for a Saudi-sponsored mosque and Islamic centre east of Athens to be visible from the international airport.
That provoked demonstrations by nearby residents of the staunchly conservative town of Peannia.
Today there's a small Greek Orthodox chapel on site, built to commemorate the protests which thwarted the mosque proposal. On special occasions a bell is rung, and on the hilltop a cross now defiantly looks towards the airport.
"We are Orthodox Christians here," says Angelo Kouias, a Peannia resident, involved in the protests. "We believe that when you arrive at the frontier of Greece it would be better to see a church to symbolise our country rather than a mosque."
"We don't want another Kosovo here close to Athens," says Dr Athanasius Papagiorgiou, a surgeon and president of the group which opposed the plan, the religiously conservative Association of St John. "Kosovo used to be a centre for the orthodox faith, and today it's nothing."
Lost privilege
Professor George Moustakis represents a different face of orthodoxy - a campaigner for interfaith understanding who joined a petition in favour of a mosque 17 years ago.
"I've always opposed the connection of church and state here in Greece, which has meant the church took the decision about other denominations and other faiths and their buildings for worship," he says. [But for all his airy-fairy ideals, he is paving the way to connection of Islam to state]
"Parliament has now voted and the church lost that privilege. So there is no problem about the mosque, the government supports it, so does the Orthodox Church." [All sold out to the Saudis?]
With the church veto gone and support from the current centre-right government, Naim El Ghandour - who in daily life imports high fashion fabric designs - is the man coordinating plans for a new mosque to be built in the north of Athens.
"The Muslims of Athens are Greek tax-payers and we have a right to pray in a respectful building," he says "We're asking the government for financial help. We're not looking for foreign sponsors, this will be a Greek mosque for Greek Muslims." [Solution: live in Saudi Arabia & pray there. Greeks are not Muslims. All taxpayers are not equal. No such thing as 'Greek Muslims'. What a scam. Greeks do not deserve the imposition of Islamic culture, religion and political power upon native Greeks, hundreds of years after fighting off Islamic invasion.]
The saga of the Athens mosque finds echoes elsewhere in Europe. The city of Grenada in Spain has just witnessed the opening of its first new mosque since the 15th Century when the Spanish re-conquered the Iberian peninsula from the Moorish Islamic rulers who built the historic mosques and palaces of Andalusia. [Sacrilege. I'm not religious, but I see this as a desecration. A desecration of European territory, history, culture and society.]
The new mosque opened for worship only after two decades of objections from the local authorities on planning grounds.
And in Italy a mosque planned for seven years in Colle di Val d'Elsa in a picturesque corner of Tuscany has divided the local community. There the local authority supports the need for a mosque but there have been objections from residents.
It is a scenario likely to be repeated around the EU as the need for immigrant labour draws into the community those of a different faith, who then naturally wish to take up their equal right to a place of worship. [What, Latin America hasn't a population that would work in Europe?]
Shouting 'Greece belongs to the Greeks' and 'No mosque in Athens,' Golden Dawn's supporters stage rally
Some 700 members and supporters of Greek neo-Nazi party Golden Dawn protested Saturday against the construction of Athens' first official mosque, the state-run Athens News Agency reported.
Shouting "Greece belongs to the Greeks" and "No mosque in Athens", protesters gathered in the Eleonas neighborhood in central Athens where the mosque will be constructed, according to the agency.
Lawmaker Eleni Zaroulia -- the wife of Golden Dawn leader Nikos Michaloliakos -- and three more of the party's elected deputies reportedly participated in the protest.
Michaloliakos is currently in pre-trial detention, charged with running a criminal organisation following a musician's murder by one of the group's supporters in September.
In November, the government announced that a Greek consortium had been chosen to lead the construction of Athens' first mosque, 13 years after plans were first announced.
Five previous attempts to find a business group to back the project had failed.
Athens is one of the few European capitals without an official mosque, but in recent years several non-official places of worship have appeared in the Greek capital thanks to an increasing numbers of immigrants from countries such as Pakistan. [One of the few European capitals without an official mosque? No wonder the clerics are issuing victory fatwas.]
In 2011, the Greek government was forced to adopt a law ensuring the mosque's construction.
But concerns over where to place the mosque and protests from the far right led to the failure of five contract tenders.
The only official mosques in Greece are situated in the northeast region of Thrace, where a minority group of Muslim Turks live.
Construction of First Mosque in Athens to Start Soon
By Philip Chrysopoulos -
Aug 5, 2015
Construction of the first mosque in Athens will start as soon as final details of the much-delayed project are ironed out and the building permit is about to be issued.
It has been seventy years since it was decided to build a mosque in Athens. The delays have been a constant source of tension with the Muslim world. The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation has been highly critical of the delays, with the Minister of Culture, Education and Religious Affairs Aristides Baltas stressing that these delays are used to defame Greece. ['seventy years' must be a mistake. must be 7 years. / So Greece is being *bullied* into mosque building, given 'tensions with the Muslim world'. Greece, tell them you'll comply when there's a magnificent church of victory erected in Mecca.]
In recent years the tender for the construction had been repeated five times and a successful bidder was selected in November 2013. The project has a budget of 964,000 euros and it will be constructed on a plot of land owned by the Greek Navy. It is located in the area of Eleonas in Athens where a former Navy workshop building will be converted into a mosque.
The last detail remaining is the settlement of a stream that should not cause any more delays.
The building of the Athens mosque is one of the priorities of the SYRIZA government and Alexis Tsipras has promised that he will complete it. The project, however, is met with many reactions from the Greek Orthodox Church. Metropolitan Bishop of Piraeus Seraphim has appealed to stop the construction.
Neocon agenda British Council propaganda serves the interests of those that do not have to live with the consequences of their demented policies -- yet.
Europe permitted itself to be flooded by Muslim immigration and has dutifully permitted construction of mosques, while Athens is the sole remaining European capital that hasn't capitulated to Saudi Arabia -- and that presumably includes even Moscow, which recently opened a mosque.
Greece is being bullied into constructing an Islamic edifice, despite the obvious and understandable opposition of the Greek people.
Saudi Arabia is behind this mosque project and is most likely behind all the mosque projects in Europe, as radical Islamic clerics issue fatwas declaring victory of Islam over Europe.
The EU is an organisation that promotes the interests of foreign entities and the destruction and Islamisation of Europe.
Europe needs to reconfigure -- fast.
Putin Opens New Mosque in Moscow Amid Lingering Intolerance
By NEIL MacFARQUHARSEPT. 23, 2015
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia spoke on Wednesday about Islam and the war in Syria at the opening of Moscow’s largest mosque.
By REUTERS on Publish Date September 23, 2015. Photo by RIA Novosti/Reuters. Watch in Times Video »
MOSCOW — Against rather long odds, including a hostile mayor, a vocal constituency irritated by Muslim rituals, and criminal rackets loath to see valuable real estate lost to charitable organizations, Moscow inaugurated a glittering, elaborate new mosque on Wednesday.
It took 10 years to come to fruition, in fact. The opening was a singular event in a city where a wave of bombings by Muslim extremists that started around 2000 generated an animosity toward the faith that never entirely abated.
Flanked by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey and Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority, President Vladimir V. Putin used his speech at the inauguration of the mosque, which he called the biggest mosque in Europe, to emphasize that Russia would develop its own system of religious education and training to counter extremism.
Pew Poll Britain least Islamophobic of all European nations that were studied & Britain nevertheless where Muslims hated their host country the most.
Real religion has become individualism.
Nonetheless, a great desire for spirituality.
Spirituality without the church, without organised religion & moral codes.
Morality has been privatised.
What's right for me, is the basis for moral and cultural relativism.
Relativism involves no judgement to be permitted of people's lifestyles; the development of multiculturalism and victim culture, based on the doctrine that the values of the majority by definition are illegitimate, because they exclude the minorities.
Under the doctrine of relativism, there is no objective truth; everything is a matter of opinion, because my values are the equal of your values and therefore it is merely my opinion versus your opinion.
Under the doctrine of relativism, there is no objectivity; there is no truth.
This has given rise to a moral and social anarchy, in which Britain is rapidly retreating to a pre-modern age of irrationality.
Having disaggregated [divided] truth, we are no longer able to use the reason that bases itself on truth.
Yet we make a fetish of reason. It is in the name of reason -- scientific reason, also known as empiricism -- we have exiled religion and declared that god is dead because the biblical stories are merely primitive superstition, as they don't correspond to the dictates of reason as defined by empiricism.
Believe in a wide range of crap.
Complete disintegration of rationality, belief, cultural identity, morality, spirituality and religion has created a cultural vacuum.
Britain, Islamists filling the vacuum by:
1)
terrorising population through terror;
2)
converting the most vulnerable: criminals, mentally disturbed, young who look for meaning beyond materialism.
3)
exploiting victim culture, which has arisen out of doctrine of multiculturalism to claim that in the interests of 'equality' they must have preferential treatment in the public square, backed up by the threat of terrorism. Intellectual elite in Britain has fallen for this hook, line & sinker, unlike the public, who most certainly have not.
But our intellectual, political and security establishment in large measure is saying, instead of Muslims in Britain being treated on the principles of equality like any other minority, they have allowed and, indeed, condoned and encouraged, the steady encroachment of Islam into the public sphere.
So Britain now has earnest discussions by UK's most senior lawyers of the extent to which Islamic law can and should be permitted to encroach into the field of the English common law, although the principles of Islamic law are inimical to the English law and to the canons of Western society and British society.
Archbishop of Canterbury stated: entirely proper for British Muslims to have recourse to sharia family law alongside English common law.
He was somewhat surprised by the explosive reaction he provoked.
What he was saying we should have no fear of as a hypothetical enticement for the future was already happening, in spades.
In Britain, there's a steady development of Muslim enclaves which are governed informally by parallel jurisdiction of sharia law, a kind of embryonic state within a state.
Britain already turns an official blind eye to such things as cousin marriage, genital mutilation of women, honour violence, and polygamy.
Indeed, Britain is now, as a state, encouraging and condoning polygamy, because Britain is now giving welfare benefits to the multiple wives of Muslim men.
Britain's Prime Minister has said that Britain should become the global centre of sharia finance.
What is not understood, is that this will institutionalise Islamism in Britain.
It has come as a shock for some of Britain’s banks to find that on their sharia boards advising them about their sharia finance arrangements, sit those who are not wholly unassociated with Islamic terrorism and with al-Qaeda.
Sharia, as understood by Melanie Phillips, does not prohibit the charging of interest. Sharia merely prohibits exorbitant rates of interest.
Sharia loans will entail the Islamisation of borrowers, Phillips states.
British establishment refuses to see all of this and refuses to accept that religion is at the heart of the problem, and refuses to accept that what Britain is facing is an Islamic jihad.
British establishment has instead accepted the Muslims' own assertion that what we are facing in terms of terror is nothing whatsoever to do with religion and if anyone says that Islam is a religion of violence, they will kill them.
British establishment thinks that by seeking to accommodate this Muslim narrative of encroachment into the public sphere, they will draw the Muslim sting and get the Muslim community on-side, they will draw the sting of anger against Britain, they will turn jihadists into model citizens, and they will separate the community from al-Qaeda.
British establishment think that the Islamic religion in the form of the Muslim Brotherhood is an antidote to al-Qaeda -- an antidote to terror. They think the Muslim Brotherhood is a counter-radicalisation movement.
As a result, they are using the Muslim Brotherhood and bringing it into the heart of British establishment, because they fail to understand that what Britain is facing is a pincer movement of Islamism being used against British society, not just through terrorism but also through cultural attack.
Britain is seeing Leninist Islamism in the form of al-Qaeda, as well as Gramscian Islamism in the form of Tariq Ramadan and cultural Muslim Brotherhood onslaught, which corresponds to and is using the Gramscian onslaught on the basic tenets of Western civilisation through such things as the capture of the intelligentsia, the capture of the universities, the capture of the establishment, the capture of the civil service, the destruction of such things as family and nation, and substitution of the values of the excluded and transgressive for the values of the normal.
That is the Gramscian project. It has succeeded in Britain absolutely to the letter. And the Islamists are coming along and Islamising Gramsci. That's what Britain has.
The government does not see this, so Britain now has Muslim Brotherhood people at the centre of government, advising government on how to combat Islamist extremism.
Melanie Phillips has sat in defence establishment seminars, where she has seen hard-bitten people from the security establishment sitting lapping up Islamits bamboozling them with a sanitised and highly selective version of Islam.
Melanie Phillips states that she knows that the British police are giving sensitive security information to Muslim extremists who are on their liaison groups with the community, which are not vetted in case they upset the Muslim community and they are asking permission of these people before they conduct raids.
What this is doing is undermining the true moderate Muslims in Britain, of whom there are certainly some, but not by any means as many as is said to be, but they do exist.
Cardinal Pell painted a benign and optimistic picture of relations between the non-Muslim and Muslim minority in Australia.
Melanie Phillips makes a couple of points, which Pell did not fully acknowledge:
1. Australia has very few Muslims compared to Britain and what there is in Europe, and that of course makes a considerable difference.
2. Key thing about Australia is that this relatively happy state of affairs follows the incredibly hard line taken by John Howard and other ministers in that government, who basically said in terms, repeatedly: this is the line we are drawing, we are a European Western society, you live here on our terms, or else you go -- and by the way, we are not letting a lot of you in and like it or lump it, these are our terms. This is our society, this is our culture, you are welcome to take part in it, but on our terms.
Melanie Phillips states, this is what has to happen. Britain has to draw the cultural line in the sand.
"The British Muslims say to us, we want equality. We are a minority, we want equality. And the establishment, because its so bamboozled by multiculturalism, thinks that equality means equality of the minorities with the majority. But it doesn't.
The deal since the establishment has been that the majority upholds its own society -- and in the case of Britain and the West, tenets of liberalism, of tolerance of the disconnect between religion and the public square -- and that all minorities are treated the same *as each other* within that.
In other words, they are all free and welcome to practise communities of faith, but where those faiths may conflict with the dominant values of the majority, those values must give way. ... In terms of the public sphere, it's ours: you do not colonise it. So not one inch will we give to sharia, because we give it to no other minority."
Britain has gone hell for leather in the opposite direction and that is why Britain is the most tolerant nation in Europe towards its Muslim minority, and it is the most hated by that minority.
Hard to weigh up how seriously to take Melanie Phillips, as she is very bound up in defending Israel -- ie Israel can do no wrong -- & it sounds like the US can't do wrong either (eg 2007 videos I just looked at).
That could be unimportant, but it could also be a significant thing.
The threat is probably real (but not necessarily for the reasons she thinks). The rest I don't buy.
Israel never gets bad press, but from the way this lady's talking in the videos I've seen, you'd think the press was crucifying Israel.
Israel is always treated as an exception: Tzipi Livni arrest warrant ignored; over 120,000 signature petition to arrest Netanyahu not discussed in UK parliament, contrary to own rules; the "Israel has a right to defend itself" constant refrain, as Israel was pounding Gaza (which is like an open prison); the massive amount of aid Israel receives from the US; the military aid Israel received from Germany; the considerable amount of kowtowing to Israel and supporters of Israel that the West seems to do, are just some of the things that come to mind.
EU-NATO IMPERIALISM ❌ 