• Police on High Alert!
  • Story IGNORED by CNN, Fox, Washington Post
  • What happened to the poor family?
  • Were they given a mansion in Kensington?
  • Did Cameron & Miliband apologize to them?
  • The UN Security Council did nothing to help!

Ham Anti Muslim Attack Shocks Nottingham

Neighbours shocked after cross wrapped in ham is left on Muslim family's doorstep in Bingham

Nottingham Post


Anti-Muslim Ham Attack Shocks Nottingham

OnIslam, 24 November 2012

The attack occurred on Tuesday evening when the father discovered a cross wrapped in ham on his doorstep.

CAIRO – A British Muslim family has faced a hate attack after a cross wrapped in ham was left on their doorstep in Bingham, Nottingham, as their neighbors expressed solidarity, rejecting the unexpected vicious attack.

"I'm disgusted and shocked,” a 39-year-old father was recently made redundant from his job as a collection agent for Royal Bank of Scotland, told Nottingham Post.

“My wife is in bits – she's very angry and in fear of her life. I don't want to leave my wife and kids here."

The attack occurred on Tuesday evening when the father discovered a cross wrapped in ham on his doorstep.

"There was a knock on the door and I went to open it. Nobody was there, but the cross was propped up against the door,” he said.

"It fell into the house when I opened the door. I noticed sliced ham was tied to it."

The family had lived in West Bridgford but the 31-year-old mum and two boys, aged eight and 10, moved to Bingham about three weeks ago after the parents separated.

The dad still lives in West Bridgford, but was in the house in Edinburgh Drive, Bingham, on Tuesday helping the family settle in.

Police are investigating the incident as they appealed for anyone who may have seen someone running away from the scene to contact them.

A spokeswoman said police were also still investigating two incidents in recent months where graffiti had been daubed on an Asian takeaway in Bingham.

Hostility against British Muslims, estimated at nearly 2.5 million, have been on the rise since 2005’s 7/7 attacks.

Police data shows that 1,200 anti-Muslim attacks were reported in Britain in 2010.

A Financial Times opinion poll showed that Britain is the most suspicious nation about Muslims.

A poll of the Evening Standard found that a sizable section of London residents harbor negative opinions about Muslims.


The attack was vehemently condemned by the family’s neighbors.

"It's awful,” Sarah Winter, 32, of nearby Hill Drive said.

“I see the lady walking her kids to school and, as a mum myself, I really feel for her. What a terrible thing to have happened.”

"I've lived here all my life and I've never heard of anything like this before."

Flora Smith, 71, also of Hill Drive, agreed.

"I'm shocked to hear that has happened,” Smith said.

“I wouldn't say people in this area are racist at all. Putting something like that outside someone's house is very upsetting and I'm very shocked about it."

A resident of Edinburgh Drive, who did not want to be named, added: "Straightaway you think 'that must mean something' for someone to have gone to the lengths of putting a cross with ham on it together."

Last month, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has vowed to put an end to religious hate crimes against Muslims.

He also announced an extra £214,000 funding for an initiative called Tell Mama (Measuring Anti-Muslim Attacks) run by interfaith group Faith Matters.

The national organization will help to inform a cross-government working group set up to tackle the problem and follows work in the Jewish community, by the Community Security Trust, to record anti-Semitic attacks and shape action to prevent them.

Along with monitoring anti-Muslim incidents, which is also done by Islamophobia Watch, Engage and the Islamic Human Rights Commission, Faith Matters would also offer a personal service to victims.

Terrified Muslim family flee home after cross wrapped in ham is left on their doorstep

Racist abuse scrawled on driveway and family screamed at in street

Father finds young son plotting escape routes from house

Murad Alam, 39, said he had to explain racism to his two children

By Emma Reynolds, 31 January 2013

A Muslim family have fled their home after a cross wrapped in ham was left on their doorstep.

The shocking incident took place in the normally sedate market town of Bingham, Notts, recently named eighth in a survey of the best places in England to raise children.

Murad Alam, 39, said he had been forced to move his wife and two sons, aged eight and 10, to a 'safer' area.

[Photo: Nasty: Racist graffiti was scrawled on the driveway and locals screamed abuse at the children in the street]

The family said they were the target of more racial abuse after the cross was left outside their suburban home last December, despite calling in the police.

Racist graffiti was scrawled on their driveway and locals screamed insults at the children in the street.

Consumption of pork and ham or any 'flesh of swine' is forbidden by Islam.

In the wake of the intimidation, Mr Alam said he found his young son plotting escape routes from the house and neighbourhood on his computer.

Mr Alam said: 'My wife and children also had names called at them in the street.

'The first incident was when the big, wooden cross, wrapped in ham, fell into the house after a knock at the door.'

He said they had names such as 'Paki' and 'tramp' shouted at them in the street.

Mr Alam said his wife and children, who he did not want to be named, had been left 'terrified' by the attacks.

He said: 'The kids have been abused a number of times; the eldest had smoke blown in his face by an elderly local gentleman.

'It really annoys me that they should use a cross and try and turn this into a religious argument.
'My family were terrified from the very first incident; my wife had never experienced racism, neither had my kids.

'In fact I had to explain to my children what racism even was, because they're so young they didn't understand the concept that someone could dislike you because of your skin colour or religion.'
The family has now moved to nearby West Bridgford, a suburb of Nottingham, where they say they feel safe.

Mr Alam said Bingham was generally a pleasant place with a good reputation and it was a shame it had been tarred by their experiences.

Despite being rated in the top-ten places to raise children by finance firm Family Investments, Mr Alam said there were some who spoiled it.

'The week before we moved there, Bingham was named the eighth best place to live in the UK - but that's if you're white - there are not many Asian or black faces there.

'It is a nice, generally middle-class village and I'm sure most of the people there are great, it's just these choice few.'

Nottinghamshire Police said a 13-year-old boy had been arrested in connection with the attacks but he was later released without charge.

Mr Alam said he had nothing but gratitude for the police involved in his family's case.

He added: 'Nottinghamshire Police fitted secret cameras, security lighting and after the graffiti, they were literally parked at the end of the alley for days, 24/7.

'It's just a shame that no-one has come forward to name the people who are behind it.'

Fiyaz Mughal, director of Tell Mama, a national service that records and analyses anti-Muslim attacks, said: 'This is one of a number of cases that we have seen where the anti-Muslim prejudice has had a shocking impact on the wider family.

'We provided practical support to the family where we could. They are though, moving away and fear that the perpetrators and the air of anti-Muslim prejudice in the area was just too much, which is very, very sad.'


That's disgusting

Disgusting behaviour. There is no place for racism, we are all human regardless of colour

dispicable, sometimes I ashamed to be English

How sad of someone to terrorise a family. If everyone looked the same they would still find someone to terrorise. Hope they find them!

This person or person's must be brought to justice! how can we allow this to happen in the UK!!!

how awful.uneducated people

Disgusting, shocking behaviour. Whoever did this does not represent British values. What's perhaps even more shocking is that this seems to be the culmination of a long series of incidents. Shameful.

He added: 'Nottinghamshire Police fitted secret cameras, security lighting and after the graffiti, they were literally parked at the end of the alley for days, 24/7. WOW - yet, a friend of mine who attracted the attention of the scumbag gangster family who he used to live near, that tormented him, beat him senseless, smashed his windows, vandalised his car constantly was told by the police 'there's nothing we can do without any evidence'. just wow.

I nearly fell over when i read this. Myself and family suffered 4 years of antisocial behavor, The perpertrators youths. I was verbally abused daily had 2 cars vandalised,my kids were bullied at school and out. false Disgusting accusations were made about us. It was 4 years of hell we had to buy our own cameras, anything we did catch on film was deemed inadmissable by the police. One evening things escalated three people in our street called the police and they didn't even bother to come out. Seems some peoples safety is more important than others. I have completely lost any respect i had for the police. We had to find our own way out.

It's terrible that anyone should treat anybody like this, I'm sure those people that carried out this attack using the symbol of the cross aren't sitting in church every Sunday anyway! Worse though for the Christians living in the muslim countries, they get persecuted and beheaded!

This problem will only get worse. In many of its parts, the UK is becoming a nasty, depressing little place to live and work

I hate ignorance. From those young Muslim men in London to this white teen in Nottingham...people need to learn a bit of respect, on both sides of the board!

Why are all the comments red arrowed? Are there really so many people who actually AGREE with what these people have done, to mark down comments stating how wrong it is?

Voted eighth best place in England to bring up a family?It looks like a right dump to me.

oh look what the government have caused

So the police have the funds and resources to install CCTV and sit out side their house 24/7 ??? . If I call my local police when I have been burgled they don't have the time or resources to even visit . Some thing not right here .

This is a truly dreadful and frightening article but, not surprising to me. There are many, many people in this country who feel they have been pushed too far when it comes to unfettered immigration and, sadly, this is how the disenfranchised within our society will ultimately react. I hope I am wrong; I really do, but I don't believe I am.

thousands of britons reside in muslim countries .

It is pretty clear there is a bit of deliberate red arrow engineering going on here.

So the police have the funds and resources to install CCTV and sit out side their house 24/7 ??? . If I call my local police when I have been burgled they don't have the time or resources to even visit . Some thing not right here .

thats just sad doing that to a family whos no different to most of us just the fact that they have a different religion........hate to say it but things like this will only get worse with how things are going.

I cannot believe what I am seeing on this thread,!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is utterly despicable. I hope that Mr Alam and his wife realise that the pondlife that did this are in no way representative of the rest of the British population.

We are no longer accepting comments


Most "hate crimes" are just pranks or are self-perpetuated petty insults designed to generate sympathy.

If it was a local person who did it, perhaps he'd been buggered by some male in the family. Or perhaps this Muz family are just scummy neighbours who annoy everyone. Perhaps it was the local Negroes, upset because these Pakis had moved onto their turf and there are only so many "poor minority" scams that can be carried out in such a small town.

Bingham has a population of 9,000. And approximately 500 houses are now being built for blow-ins. There have been concerns that the 1000+ people who will move into these new houses will require more and improved services which so far the local councils are proving reluctant to provide. Another 1000 houses are planned to be built as part of The Crown Estate's "Future Bingham" project, "swapping employment land for housing and community use."

This is not the only major news story to come out of little Bingham. On 2013.03.06, during a Champions League football match between The Kike's Manchester United and Real Madrid, an 18 year old man rang Bingham's 999 service to protest against the Negro Luís Carlos Almeida da Cunha ("Nani") being sent off with a red card. The story made national headlines, and trended as the number one news story on news.sky.com. Meanwhile White kids are being raped by Niggers and Pakis all across the land.

The so-called "victims" were "Asians". The mother of the ham-cross family wears "traditional Asian clothes", by which I doubt is meant kimono. Most likely Pakis or Afghans, etc. The restaurants allegedly "attacked" were Singaporean (mostly Chinese, Malays and Indians) and Balti. Perhaps the restaurants are serving dogs or cats, which upset someone, for some reason. Or was it Negroes up to their usual hi-jinx? Perhaps some local "AntiFa" scum threw stones at the Balti restaurant because the Balti flag was displayed there:

Flag of Gilgit Baltistan United Movement

Of course these stories are trash, badly written, full of nonsense. Why is an alleged "attack" (ham-cross) on Muz "racist"? Muz are a "race"?

The father says they are not serious Mohammadans -- perhaps the "attack" came from serious Muz who were sending them a message to get serious about Mohammadanism.

Now if you want to annoy Muz, send a Koran wrapped in bacon.

UK Muslim Family Under Racial Attacks

OnIslam, 10 December 2012

The offensive graffiti attacking Islam and Allah was painted on the family path on Saturday

LONDON – An offensive graffiti has been painted outside the home of a British Muslim family in Bingham in north-western Britain, weeks after a cross wrapped in ham was left on their doorstep.

"My kids are scared and crying,” the 39-year-old Muslim father told the BBC News Online.

"They are in fear of their lives.”

The offensive graffiti attacking Islam and Allah was painted on the family path on Saturday morning.

The attack is not the first on the family who has just moved to Bingham last October after the mother separated from her husband.

The husband said he now had to move in with his family to protect them.

The 31-year-old mother and her two sons, eight and 10, say they have suffered five or six racist incidents since they moved to Bingham.

The most recent attack occurred three weeks ago when the family found a cross wrapped in ham left on their doorstep.

"Two days after the first incident I saw the eldest on the laptop looking at a map, looking for escape routes in case anything goes wrong,” the father said.

"I'm not even a strict Muslim at all, so for this to happen to my family is a joke."

The Muslim father believes that the attack clearly targets his wife.

“Clearly they are targeting my wife,” he said.

"I've got to assume it's because of the way she dresses in traditional Asian clothes, with a traditional headdress."

Nottinghamshire Police said they asked the council to remove the graffiti as soon as possible.

Hostility against British Muslims, estimated at nearly 2.5 million, has been on the rise since 2005’s 7/7 attacks.

Police data shows that 1,200 anti-Muslim attacks were reported in Britain in 2010.

A Financial Times opinion poll showed that Britain is the most suspicious nation about Muslims.

A poll of the Evening Standard found that a sizable section of London residents harbor negative opinions about Muslims.

Hate Crimes

A 13-year-old boy from Bingham was arrested in connection with the ham-covered cross and bailed.

The incident is not the first as the boy was also arrested in connection with two other incidents involving the same family.

"He is suspected of shouting racial abuse at a 32-year-old woman on 3 December and throwing a stone at their window on 4 December," a police statement said.

Police said he was also arrested in connection with incidents affecting two restaurants in Bingham.

On August 11, racist graffiti was scrawled on a Singaporean restaurant in Market Place, and on October 31 bricks were thrown at a Balti restaurant in Market Place.

A Nottinghamshire Police spokesperson warned against a sharp increase in the hate and racial attacks.

"Hate crime is completely unacceptable in any degree or form and Nottinghamshire Police takes any incidents of this nature incredibly seriously,” he said.

"Increased patrols have been mounted to provide reassurance and officers have been conducting house-to-house enquiries and working very closely with the victims to ensure they are safe."

Graffiti and 'ham cross' outside Muslim home in Bingham

The graffiti was painted on the path outside the family's home

BBC, Dec 9, 2013

Offensive graffiti attacking Allah and Islam has been painted outside a Muslim family's home weeks after a cross wrapped in ham was left by their door.

The 31-year-old mother and two sons, eight and 10, say they have suffered five or six racist incidents since they moved to Bingham, Notts, in October.

The graffiti was painted on their path on Saturday morning.

A 13-year-old Bingham boy was arrested in connection with the ham-covered cross on Friday and bailed.

The family, who do not want to be identified, moved to the Nottinghamshire market town after the mother separated from her husband.

The cross fell into the house when the door was opened

The husband said he had now had to move in with his family to protect them.

"They are in fear of their lives," he said. "My kids are scared and crying.

"Two days after the first incident I saw the eldest on the laptop looking at a map, looking for escape routes in case anything goes wrong.

"I'm not even a strict Muslim at all, so for this to happen to my family is a joke."

The father, 39, still lives in West Bridgford in Nottinghamshire, but was in his wife's house in Bingham when the cross was put outside on 20 November.

'Targeting wife'

He said there was a knock on the door at about 18:30 GMT.

"The cross was upside down outside the door so when I opened the door it fell in," he said. "I was disgusted straight away. Clearly they are targeting my wife.

"I've got to assume it's because of the way she dresses in traditional Asian clothes, with a traditional headdress."

He believes the person responsible for the cross must have followed his wife home to know where she lives.

Nottinghamshire Police said they asked the council to remove the graffiti as soon as possible.

'Racial abuse'

A Nottinghamshire Police spokesperson said: "Hate crime is completely unacceptable in any degree or form and Nottinghamshire Police takes any incidents of this nature incredibly seriously.

"Increased patrols have been mounted to provide reassurance and officers have been conducting house-to-house enquiries and working very closely with the victims to ensure they are safe."

Muslim Family Driven From Bingham Home After Islamophobic Abuse And 'Ham Cross'

The Huffington Post, 31 Jan 2013

A Muslim family had a pork-wrapped wooden cross placed outside their home, their mother abused in the street and smoke blown into the face of a child by an elderly man, after moving into a middle-class Nottinghamshire village.

The BBC reports that Murad Alam, 39, had found his young son plotting an "escape route" on Google Earth from their home in Bingham, Nottinghamshire, after becoming afraid that racist vigilantes would attack their house.

Alam said he, his wife and their two sons aged eight and 10 had been forced to leave their home in the village, once voted one of the best places to raise a family in the UK, because of the constant abuse.

And he said that he has tried to dissuade his wife from wearing a headscarf, in order not to attract too much attention.

Speaking to the BBC's Asian Network, Alam described the first incident, hearing the door bell ring and finding no-one at the door, but a wooden cross propped up against the door frame.

"I thought, who's put this cross here. And I thought it was kids who had done it. And then I realised something slimy was touching my hand and saw the cross was wrapped in ham and pork.

"And I realised, that's time and effort gone into that, to buy the ham, the wood, make the cross. That's not kids that's a grown man who has done that."

Locals shouted "Paki" and "tramp" at Alam's wife and children in the street, and "the eldest had smoke blown in his face by an elderly local gentleman," Alam said.

He believes the objection many had is to his wife's hijab. "I imagine if she wore jeans and t-shirt it would be ok, I honestly believe that.

"I actually would prefer if she didn't wear it, but it's her choice. I would prefer not to attract the attention and I've seen how society's going.

"British society is going more and more anti-Muslim, going downhill, you hear about new stuff every day."

Police fitted secret cameras, security lighting and monitored Alam's property after offensive graffiti was sprayed on a path by the house.

Before the attacks, Alam and his wife had been separated, and his wife moved to the village for a job with the council.

But when the attacks worsened, Alam moved back into his wife's new home, feeling that he needed to protect his family.

"As a father I have responsibilities, never mind what's going on with me and my wife, I had to be there for my family."

Bingham, once named as one of the top ten places to raise a family, is "like the village from Hot Fuzz," according to Alam. "It's beautiful, a village lifestyle with some of the best schools in the county."

Predominantly white, the town has a popular farmers market and an affluent population, many of whom commute to Nottingham.

Nottinghamshire Police said a 13-year-old boy had been arrested in connection with the attacks but he was later released without charge.

Alam said he had nothing but gratitude for the police involved in his family's case.

Fiyaz Mughal, director of Tell Mama, a national service that records and analyses anti-Muslim attacks, told the BBC: "This is one of a number of cases that we have seen where the anti-Muslim prejudice has had a shocking impact on the wider family as a whole.

"We provided practical support to the family where we could. They are though, moving away and fear that the perpetrators and the air of anti-Muslim prejudice in the area was just too much which is very, very sad."


This comment has been removed.

i find it totally un-amusing that you can only be racist or percieved to be racist if you are white. double standards and misrepresentation is going to bring an end to imigration and about time i say. we should all be able to live under the same sun and be able to call all brother or sister as we are all humans but like gorge orwell said we are all human... but some of us are more human then others. when do you hear of a terrorist group from england killing loads of muslims or whatever... it is predominately muslims who are killing anyone who does not believe there idiiology so shame and boo hoo it is time you got some of your own medicine.

Ham and Pork, is this topic "Spam"

They could always retaliate by leaving a bar of soap outside a BNP member's house.

If left is right and right is wrong, decide!

The way things are going we shall not be able stem the tide. It would appear that global geurilla groups of organised fanatical Islamist extremists are gradually integrating into societies where they can cause the most disruption or destruction. Mali, Tunisia and even the East End of London being an example. That however, does not give our civilised societies the right to retaliate against those ethnic minorites trying to live a normal peaceful life, and not be pedjudiced against them. It being obviouse to me that these fanatics have no criteria as to their hatred, and will not change..

nearly every day we find dog or cat poo in the garden

racist hates goes all directions , love to hear his views on the muslim patrol case, no shock media hush on that, and this will drag for years, double standards.

wow, I thought British people were polite. Sounds like something that would happen in the southern US. I hope these people are ashamed of themselves.

Why should we be ashamed of ourselves...... Have you any idea of how our country is treated by our immigrants.........? Perhaps if you saw and knew we cant do anything other than "accept it" you wouldnt be too happy either...........

really? You think it is acceptable for adults to act like high school bullies to their neighbours, to young children? It is disgusting! These children were planning ESCAPE ROUTES because they were afraid their neighbours were going to physically harm them. I'm sorry, but whatever injury you seem to think they caused by being different is a load of bullshit. this is intollerable, racist behaviour and I am quite disapointed in the actions of the aggresors. The UK is supposedly a multicultural and civilized country.... ACT LIK IT!!!

I agree with you as a Brit i am disgusted because we are acting as bad as it is claimed by a minority the Muslims treat non-muslims. I regret to say it a sign of the times.

It is indeed regretful.

That's just the sort of pious, self-serving platitudes we need in this country. Nice one. ;0)

Well done Government UK your old trick of divide & conquer is still going well. This time its stirring up home grown racism to stir up the simpletons & there are many on here. Muslims, I dont believe you had anything to do with terror attacks in London or New York. You are caught up in your own ludicrous religion the same as Christians, Jews and the rest. Its time to believe we are all just one race & stand up to the hatemongers. Look at kids of all races playing in the streets, laughing, with no sense of hate. Dont worry your parents will soon change that. Any sick racists here. Let your kids teach you

I am far from a racist but I do feel we were being over-run by immgrants who dont pay there way. I currently live outside Manchester and some nice areas have become slums. Why should our coutryside become that way also. Most people are proud home owners and tennants why should our standard of living become dragged down to suit ghetto living?


I JUST read it, scary numbers...........

How Interesting. If you think the UK should send back all the immigrants, can I assume you are OK with other countries sending British Nationals back to the UK? I would be slightly concerned if the 5.5 million British Citizens who live permanently abroad all had to come back. Of course that doesn’t include the people who are out of the country on a temporary basis so it would mean a sudden influx of more than 6 million people. So we’d get rid of some 3.5 million people to get at least 6 million back. I’m not sure that would help any ones job prospects or the health of our economy, but let’s not put common sense before ideology.

You overlook that our ex-pats support themselves ... and havent run those countries into the ground.

I notice the police managed to find money in their budget for secret cameras, security cameras, and surveillance for a bit of graffitti. I wonder if the met police will be makinng the same effort to capture the muslim gangs in east london who are going around terrorising the locals, and telling them that it is a muslim area, and they should get out. You walk into a shop, or petrol station with your hood up, or motorcycle helmet on, and you get asked to remove it, yet these muslim women want to be able to walk around dressed like a black letter box. Talk about double standards.

When the Police put cameras up in Birmingham in Muslim areas to catch terrorist, the Muslims complained and the police took them down.
Then the Police apologised.

Indeed I cannot condone these actions but it hardly equates to current mass ethnic cleansing and wholesale murder of Christian minorities in many Islamic controlled countries at this moment and time.

Hundreds of Coptic Christians are still in squalid prison, captured by muslims in Egypt.



Missy Ham Cross

UK Muslims Blast Un-Islamic Terror Cell

OnIslam, 27 April 2013

British Muslims leaders were quick to distance Islam from acts of terror.

CAIRO – Rejecting un-Islamic terror cells in Birmingham and Luton, a leading British Muslim organization has condemned the plans as contradicting with Islam, praising law enforcement officer’s efforts in protecting their country.

“The Ramadhan Foundation welcomes the jailing of various terrorism suspects in Birmingham and Luton,” Mohammed Shafiq, Ramadhan Foundation chief executive, told Birmingham Mail.

Shafiq comments followed a court’s decision to put eleven British Muslims in jail on Friday, April 26, for planning a so-called an Al-Qaeda-backed plot to carry out a string of bombings in UK.

The conspiracy involved at least six of the plotters travelling to Pakistan for terror training, with the eventual aim of setting off eight rucksack bombs in crowded areas and possibly other timed devices, the court heard.

Ringleader Irfan Naseer received a life sentence, his right-hand man Irfan Khalid was jailed for 18 years and co-conspirator Ashik Ali was jailed for 15 years by a judge at Woolwich Crown Court in southeast London.

Eight other members of the cell which was based in Birmingham, central England, were also sentenced on Friday.

“Your plot had the blessing of Al-Qaeda and you intended to further the aims of Al-Qaeda,” Judge Richard Henriques said as he sentenced the men.

“The only barrier between (Naseer's) team and mass murder was the intervention of the authorities.”

Shafiq welcomed the convictions as a sign that those plotting terrorist attacks will be caught and brought to justice.

“These evil men had no regard for human life and the lives of their fellow citizens,” he said.

He also paid tribute to the police forces and intelligence agencies involved with investigating and thwarting the terror plots.

“If it were not for the police and intelligence agencies these plots would have caused untold damage and loss of life in our country.”


British Muslims leaders were quick to distance Islam from acts of terror.

“There is no justification for terrorism in Islam, those engaged in these crimes are not acting in the name of our faith or our community,” Shafiq said.

“Terrorism has no religion and not only should they be shunned, they should be brought to justice,” he added.

The chief executive of Ramadhan Foundation stressed that the British Muslim community has been working to spread the true meanings of Islam.

“The British Muslim community has been working very hard to eradicate this evil amongst our midst, many Muslim organizations are dedicated to not only condemning terrorism and extremism but using the opportunities to bring them back to Islam,” Shafiq added.

Britain's 2.7 million Muslims have taken full brunt of anti-terror laws since the 7/7 attacks.

Police data shows that 1,200 anti-Muslim attacks were reported in Britain in 2010.

A Financial Times opinion poll showed that Britain is the most suspicious nation about Muslims.

A poll of the Evening Standard found that a sizable section of London residents harbor negative opinions about Muslims.

Muslims Important For Britain: Deputy PM

OnIslam, 09 November 2012

“There's absolutely no place for hate crime in modern society,” Clegg said.

CAIRO – Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has vowed to put an end to religious hate crimes against Muslims during a visit to Manchester's Muslim community, boosting the religion minority as incredibly important for the country.

“The Muslim community is incredibly important for the country,” Clegg told Manchester Evening News on Thursday, November 8.

“This is a national issue but I was very keen to do this in Manchester where its particularly relevant.”

The Liberal Democrat leader was visiting the British Muslim Heritage Centre, in Whalley Range, for a town hall-style summit with local community members and national Islamic organizations.

He was being joined by faith and communities minister Baroness Warsi and Lib Dem communities minister Don Foster.

The group also visited the Altrincham Muslim Cultural Centre, which has been the target of religiously-motivated vandalism.

“Prejudice, religious hatred, racially motivated violence -- there is no place for hate crimes in 21st-century Britain,” Clegg said during the event in Manchester, northern England.

“I cannot be clearer -- the government will do everything in its power to stamp out vile attacks motivated purely by hatred of one religion or another.”

Hostility against British Muslims, estimated at nearly 2.5 million, have been on the rise since 2005’s 7/7 attacks.

A Financial Times opinion poll showed that Britain is the most suspicious nation about Muslims.

A poll of the Evening Standard found that a sizable section of London residents harbor negative opinions about Muslims.

Fighting Prejudice

During Clegg’s visit to Manchester’s Muslim community, he pledged more funds by the British government to fight anti-Muslim tolerance.

“There's absolutely no place for hate crime in modern society,” Clegg said.

“Its an abhorrent thing.”

Clegg also announced an extra £214,000 funding for an initiative called Tell Mama (Measuring Anti-Muslim Attacks) run by interfaith group Faith Matters.

The national organization will help to inform a cross-government working group set up to tackle the problem and follows work in the Jewish community, by the Community Security Trust, to record anti-Semitic attacks and shape action to prevent them.

Along with monitoring anti-Muslim incidents, which is also done by Islamophobia Watch, Engage and the Islamic Human Rights Commission, Faith Matters would also offer a personal service to victims.

In addition to the government’s efforts, Clegg added that interfaith work between the local Muslim, Jewish and Christian communities was particularly important in standing up against intolerance.

“I will do everything in my power to make sure we take the necessary steps.”


Immediately after the terrorist plane-crashes and the bombings of "Building 7" and so on, on 2001.09.11, the Kike Troofers moved in to spread so much disinfo that 9/11 Conspiracy talk is now just a joke in the Kikestream media. So much nonsense has been spouted about 9/11 that it's almost a waste of time to try and talk about what happened that day. As soon as you start somebody will repeat some kike talking points.

I see the same thing in the response to the terrorist bombings in Boston.

This is an example, from Kikes:

The narrator says he's going to "demonstrate that at the very minimum the authorities had prior knowledge of the attack, and allowed it to happen." These are two lies. These two things are not demonstrates. It is pointed out that there were police on the roofs, and that that there were suspicious characters, undercover cops, FBI agents or private security contractors on the scene before and after the bombings. None of that is surprising, and none of it proves anything. It's just a series of observations that any sensible person can make for themselves (without the spin) -- "I wonder who that is." "What are those guys with the ear-pieces up to?" "How come those cops didn't see anything?"

He goes on to point out that police and government spokesmen refused to answer questions about undercover operations that day. Of course they're not going to discuss such matters, especially in a chaotic press conference. They'd only discuss those details if they were called before some sort of tribunal, and then they'd consult with a lawyer before answering each question put to them.

The narrator then points out that the government passed certain legislation right after the Boston bombings, and that the police locked down neighborhoods in Boston, and that there seem to be possible anomalies in the coverage of the arrests of the Tsarnaevs and the death of Tamerlan Tsarnaev. None of this "demonstrates" that the authorities had prior knowledge of or involvement in the bombings. It's possible they did, but videos like this don't prove they did. All they do is increase confusion and paranoia, and throw fog over the whole incident.

One very suspicious aspect of the case is that the FBI released photos of the Tsarnaevs, asking if the public could identify them. This is suspicious, because FBI agents had been monitoring them for years. Still, it's possible that the agent or agents responsible for monitoring the Tsarnaevs were not at work that day. For all I know they could have been off camping or at work in Russia or wherever. Not likely, but possible. If I had any authority in Boston or in Mass. or in the FBI or federal government, I'd want some answers, but so far nothing "proves" anything.

The video comes from a kike outfit called "Stormclouds Gathering", which is connected to the kike operations"Voices of Revolution", "The New Resistance", and "Caspian Report" (an Azerbaijani/Azeri-kike Soros operative) and "RP4409".

At their website they have videos of "Horrific footage of Jews being tortured in Iran", "Where was Cheney on 9/11", "Where was Rumsfeld on 9/11", "Alex Jones Smacks Down A 9/11 Kool-Aid Drinker", and totally kike trash like this:

Zionism, The State of Israel & the Rise of Antisemitism

Posted by StormCloudsGathering, September 24, 2012

The topics of Israel, Zionism and antisemitism are extremely difficult to address due to the fact that people lump together a number of highly charged concepts which should be viewed and analyzed separately. The issue is further complicated by the dismal level of historical and geopolitical understanding that the average American possesses and by the fact that there are extremists elements on both sides which cannot tolerate even the most even handed and rational criticisms.


We need to establish some basic premises here if we are going to have any sane discussion. First of all Zionism is an ideology, it is not an ethnicity or a race, or even a national identity. There are a very large number of non-Jewish Zionists, and there is a contingent of anti-Zionist Jews including the outspoken scholar Norman Finkelstein and the orthodox Jewish organization "NETUREI KARTA" which take a very strong stance against Zionism and the state of Israel. Whether you agree or disagree with their position, one thing should be very clear: Zionism is not Judaism, and it is not a position that all Jews agree with. This is a very very important distinction to make, because there are extremists on both sides of this debate which intentionally treat Zionism, Judaism and the Jewish people as one entity. [...] The result...of these false associations is hatred, and that hatred blinds people and makes them incapable of thinking and acting rationally.

Real antisemitism is beginning to grow and spread across the internet right now at an alarming rate. These elements are becoming bolder and more aggressive and are starting to openly use terms like "the Jewish problem" and the "Jewish conspiracy". I view this trend as extremely disturbing and problematic, and I condemn this kind of language whenever I encounter it...

Those who are using Anti-Semitic terms such as the "Jewish Problem" or the "Jewish Conspiracy" are not a single homogenous group. There are those who are outright neo-Nazis and who are proud to wear the name, there are others who are deeply angry because of the policies of the state of Israel and mistakenly assign the blame for those policies to the entire Jewish people, and then there are those who make these kinds of statements because they mistakenly assume that the crimes of a few high powered banker families such as the Rothchilds can be taken as a reflection of the entire Jewish people. Most people in these last two categories who don't think of themselves as neo-Nazis, and who don't want to be labeled as neo-Nazis, but the fact of the matter is that if you use this kind of overtly racist language that's exactly how the majority of the population is going to view you. Moreover speaking in these terms will instantly invalidate the rest of what you have to say for most people.


Once you see the full picture of what has been done in the name of Zionism it should be clear that attaching such a contentious ideology to the ethnic identity of the Jewish people is a mistake, and it's a mistake that could have extremely negative consequences for all Jews, including Jews who aren't Zionists and who do not support the state of Israel at all.

Another thing that should also be clarified here is that it is unfair to focus on the actions of the state of Israel while ignoring the much larger crimes being committed by the United States and NATO all across the Middle East especially since it very likely that if the U.S. and NATO would change their stance on the region Israel would follow suit. The problem is not a specific nationality or an ethnic group, the problem is the lack of respect for basic human rights and the distorted world view that people acquire when their primary source of information is the mainstream media. Right now we live in an age where human rights are given lip service when it suits the politicians and ideologues, but these rights are divvied out selectively and in a manner that treats entire cultures as subhuman. The solution to this problem is not going to be found in condemnation but rather in education


and this:

(i.e., "The poor Holocausted Kikes are just pawns of the British and Freench, oy vey!")

and this:

Anybody else sick of the divisions in this world?

North Korea - South Korea
Sunni -- Shiite
Christians -- Muslims
Muslims -- Jews
Rich -- Poor
The powers that be -- The powers that aren't
Democrats -- Republicans
Catholics -- Protestants
Whites -- Blacks
1% - 99%
Pro life- Pro choice
Conservatives -- Liberals
Politically Correct -- Politically Incorrect
Right Wing -- Left Wing
Chicken Wing
Everyone has points to make about why their side is right and why the other guy is wrong. Meanwhile, people are starving. People live in the street. People are sick and cannot get medical help. At what point do we wake up, grow up, and recognize that the only division that exists is created by our minds. The same minds that make a million other choices during the day.
Coffee -- Latte
Right -- Left
Good -- Bad
Tasteful -- Gross
Text -- Call
Talk -- Ignore
Mustard -- Grey Poupon
Just to name a few
The same mind that makes these decisions can choose to disregard divisions. How powerful is that? Yet, we choose to continue beating each other down to make sure we end up with "our share". In the immortal words of Charlie Brown, "GOOD GRIEF".
So who is sick of all this division? Are you ready to say "enough"? Are you ready to sacrifice your position to work things out for the good of all people? Are you willing to surrender the supposed power that seems to create the division?
We are all going to die eventually, and when we are dead these divisions make no difference. So what is really the point of division? It seems that the small amount of time we have on the planet could be used a little more wisely.
I wonder what would happen if we dropped the walls of insecurity and narcissism? What if we allowed ourselves to recognize that the pain we feel is the same pain that every other individual on the planet experiences. What if compassion and empathy weren't just words uttered by religious texts, but truly embraced as a part of everyday existence?
Love does not come from weakness. Love comes from the strength of maturity and the soundness of character. Creating a tough exterior may disguise the pain, but in the end, the anguish still exists. Perhaps it is time to set aside differences of opinion and embrace our true potential as a species.
So, what will it be? Do we continue to beat each other down in the name of race, religion, politics, and philosophies, or will we choose to evolve to the natural state of ease and coexistence? The choice is yours and your choice will create a ripple effect regardless.
Division is a concept and construct of the mind. Allow yourself, for just one moment, to let go of all the old programming and conditioning that has grown out of control. We can share this earth and the incredible resources it provides, or we can burn it down with the hate-fueled fires of ignorance.


and this:

A Scientific Description of God

Words are only as good as their definitions. Faulty definitions will inherently lead to faulty understandings and vice versa. This is especially true when a word and its definition are contentious.

There is no word in any language which has been the subject of as much conflict, both in the realm of ideas and in the physical world as the word “god”.


A dvd can hold multiple movies each with complete story lines; a beginning a drama and an end. When you hold that dvd in your hand you can see that all of those moments all exist simultaneously, however if you put them in a dvd player you can experience that same data as a linear time progression.

Likewise we perceive time and space because our consciousness is navigating the time space continuum, but viewed from the perspective of the singularity every moment of your life from birth to death coexist in that single moment, the now.

This has profound implications for our concept of identity for this means that we are all expressions of this same source and that in a very literal and absolute sense we are one.

This description I gave is my definition for the word god.

Obviously you don't have to use that word if you don't want to.


The destruction of the individual self is only frightening to the degree that you believe that linear time is absolute. But from the perspective of the singularity your birth, your life and your death coexist in that single eternal moment nothing is ever lost.

The singularity is here right now. We are part of it. It’s where we come from and what we are when form is gone.

Realizing this isn't a question of waking up, like flipping a switch on or off. Awareness is more accurately viewed as a spectrum.

The more we move our sense of identity away from our linear time space description to that of the eternal singularity of the now, the wider and more interesting our experience of reality becomes, and to the degree that you connect on that level, fixed beliefs and rigid concepts become less and less necessary. In fact viewed from this perspective it becomes clear that many human beliefs, especially those pertaining to spirituality are actually obstacles and hinderances which hold us back from the experience itself or distort our interpretations of it.

The more awake we are the less we cling to our preconceived notions.

Again I’d like to request that you remain calm and rational in the comments. This will be greatly facilitated if you watch this video again and research the topics mentioned rather than arguing from a point of ignorance. These are ideas that challenge our entire concept of reality so it’s only natural that it could take some time to process. It should be clear however that getting angry and defensive are not productive reactions. It’s impossible to understand a new idea when we are actively at war against that idea.


and this:

and this:

and this:

This sort of hysteria feeds into the widespread perception that the government and secret forces know everything about everyone, and are all-powerful, and are behind everything that goes on anywhere. The reality is that any bureaucracy is staffed by clock-watchers and incompetents and political appointees and over-qualified idiots.

Another line of Boston Trooferism is based on the ideas that "there were no bombs" (like "there were no planes") and that all the "victims" were actors. The same line of completely absurd kikery was spouted about the war in Libya, when kikes and their agents were stating as "absolute facts" that scenes from Tripoli were actually being shot by Hollywood directors in secret studios in Qatar. This is done to confuse morons, and to discredit anyone who ever tries to seriously discuss disinfo and conspiracies.

Another illogical fallacy promoted is the idea that because kike agencies have inserted themselves into investigations of the bombings, that that somehow means they were responsible for the bombings. One does not follow the other. It's entirely to be expected that Kikes will try to exploit any terrorist incident (whether they had a hand in it or not), for profit and for propaganda value.

The most important matters related to the Tsarnaevs are:
  • U.S. funding of Chechen terrorists in Russia, and in other places, such as Bosnia
  • U.S. political support for Chechen terrorists, including support from senators and congressmen, and from people like Zbigniew Brzezinski, and from the CFR and Trilateral Commission.
  • The role of The Kike's AEI and Jamestown Foundation, and any links between the Tsarnaevs and their familes and associates with these Kike outfits.

If these two Tsarnaev brothers were actually "patsies", in regard to this incident in Boston, and even if there were other people planting bombs there that day -- that does not necessarily mean that the Tsarnaevs weren't also involved in terrorist conspiracies. Another line of Kike Trooferism is designed to try and prevent people from analyzing the various possibilities rationally and objectively. So they start out with a preconceived conclusion, such as "Muslims were framed", or "whomever is blamed must be innocent", and then fashion the facts around that conclusion.

Not all Trooferism is purposeful disinfo. Much of it is just morons and people with poor imaginations thinking out loud, and showing how stupid they are. Most lack the imagination and the knowledge to see below what is below the surface and to detect or speculate about greater trends taking place.

For example, even if some government agency was behind the Boston bombings, it could be one faction out to discredit another faction. It could be some group within the FBI out to discredit the CIA and CFR etc's support for Chechen terrorists. It's possible (though I believe very unlikely) that Russian state security elements could be supporting Chechens in anti-American activities as a way of combatting Chechen terrorists in the Russian Federation, and to turn America's anti-Russian weapons/proxies back on America. There are multiple possibilities and variations.

It's also possible that these two brothers, acting alone or as part of a group, simply wanted to carry out this bombing in response to American military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Kike Troofersim is designed to instill hysteria, paranoia and confusion in the minds of most people, who are virtually retarded when it comes to analyzing politics, international relations, subversion and terrorism.


Funeral of Boston Attacker Troubles Muslims

OnIslam, 22 April 2013

Several mosques have reportedly refused to conduct the funeral service for Tsarnaev, one of the suspected bombers in Boston

CAIRO – The funeral of one of the Boston attackers is posing a new challenge for the Muslim community as several mosques are shying away from conducting the service.

"I would not be willing to do a funeral for him," Imam Talal Eid of the Islamic Institute of Boston, told Huffington Post.

"This is a person who deliberately killed people."

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, died Friday in a shootout with police over his alleged involvement in a twin bombing in Boston that killed three people and injured scores.

But several mosques have reportedly refused to conduct the funeral service for the dead attacker.

Eid, whose group arranges funeral prayers and burials in Boston, believes that the attacker Tamerlan Tsarnaev is no longer a Muslim after carrying out his attack.

"There is no room for him as a Muslim. He already left the fold of Islam by doing that," he said.

"In the Qur'an it says those who will kill innocent people, they will dwell in the hellfire."

Suhaib Webb, the imam of the Islamic Society of Boston Culture Center, also feels unease at conducting the funeral service for the attacker.

"I don't think I could ethically lead a prayer for him," he said.

"But I would not stop people from praying upon him."

Several mosque leaders said they would first discuss the issue of holding the funeral service for the Boston bomber if contacted.

"We have not discussed it," said a representative from Al-Marhama, an organization that shares space with the Boston Culture Center.

A similar position is taken by Masjid Al-Hoda in Kingston.

"Nobody has asked me, nobody has called me," said a man who answered the phone at the mosque.

Abdula Hameed, the imam of Masjid Al-Kareem in Providence, has the same view on the funeral.

"I'd have to talk to our board members," he said.


Angry: "Screw him. He's outside the fold of Islam. Burn his body and piss on the ashes... Let it be a message to anyone who ever does anything like this.... they will not be considered part of the Islamic community. (Maybe I'm upset.... But it's the way I feel at this moment in time)"


The Duke of Cambridge announces £10,000 film scholarships

The Duke of Cambridge has announced new scholarships for postgraduate study of film and television at Warner Bros. Studios Leavesden.

[Photo: The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge at Warner Bros Studios Photo: Getty]

By Alice Vincent, Entertainment writer, BST, 26 Apr 2013

The Duke of Cambridge has launched a new scholarship scheme for aspiring filmmakers during a visit to the new £100 million Warner Bros Studios in Leavesden with the Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry.

Applications for the Prince William Scholarships in Film, Television and Games open today and will help talented people to study a postgraduate course in one of the three industries.

The scholarships, which will offer applicants up to £10,000 to cover course fees, are supported by Bafta and Warner Bros. Applicants will receive free access to Bafta events and a funded work placement within the Warner Bros group.

Both companies hope the scholarships will help to foster talent which might otherwise be unable to enter the industry.

The scholarships were announced today in a short speech by the Duke, during the opening ceremony of Warner Bros Studios Leavesden. The Duke enjoyed seeing the real Batmobile and Batpod from the Batman films at the Studios, and joked that he hoped to see baby seats on the Batmobile in a new Dark Knight film. The studios were opened with a clapperboard.

Last month the Queen was awarded an honorary Bafta award for her performance as a Bond girl during the Olympics opening ceremony.


BAFTA was founded in 1947, by Kike Sándor László Kellner, Kike Imre József Pressburger, and other Britons.

The first director of the British Film Academy (now the British Academy of Film and Television Arts) was Roger Manvell, the co-author (with Heinrich Fraenkel) of many books on "Nazi Germany", including biographies of Adolf Hitler, Rudolf Hess, Heinrich Himmler, Joseph Goebbels and Hermann Göring. During World War II he worked in the Ministry of Information, creating propaganda films for the British government. He also lectured in universities in more than forty countries in three continents. (Heinrich Fraenkel co-wrote the Boris Karloff film, Juggernaut: "Dr. Victor Sartorius, a dedicated but dying medical researcher working in Morocco, becomes frustrated when his funding is cut off and his experiments ended. He is approached by Lady Yvonne Clifford, the young and beautiful wife of wealthy but aging aristocrat Sir Charles Clifford. She has been carrying on an affair with a gold-digging army captain and offers Sartorius the 20,000 pounds he needs to continue his research if he will become her husband's personal physician and covertly murder him. When Sir Charles' son Roger enters the picture, it is clear that he is marked for death too. Only Sartorius' altruistic nurse Joan stands in the way...")

Prince William, the Duke of Cambridge, is President of BAFTA. His wife is most likely a Kike. Kikestan gave the couple a Kike wedding contract as a wedding gift. His father, Prince Phillip, the Duke of Edinburgh, was the first president; followed by Earl Mountbatten of Burma, First Sea Lord, last Viceroy of India, Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, and by Anne, the Princess Royal. Mountbatten was responsible for the disastrous Dieppe Raid of 1942; which some among the Allied forces, notably old Monty, later claimed was ill-conceived from the start. The raid on Dieppe was a disaster, with casualties numbering in the thousands, the great majority of them Canadians. For the raid, Mountbatten and his staff constructed an underwater oil pipeline to Normandy, an artificial harbour constructed of concrete caissons and sunken ships, and developed amphibious tank-landing ships. Another project that Mountbatten proposed to Churchill was Project Habakkuk, a 600-metre aircraft carrier made from reinforced ice.

The Academy's awards are in the form of a theatrical mask designed by Mitzi Cunliffe, a U.S. Kike.

In 1991, a "controversial" BAFTA Award selection was made in the Best Drama Serial category, when Prime Suspect beat G.B.H.. Following the ceremony, four of the seven voting members of the jury signed a public statement declaring that they had voted for G.B.H. to win. Kike Irene Shubik (chairman of the jury for Best Drama Serial) refused to comment publicly on the affair, and no blame was ever attached to her.

Warner Bros. was founded by the four Kike "Warner" brothers -- Abraham Wonsal/Wonskolaser, Hirsch Moses Wonsal/Wonskolaser, Schmuel Wonsal/Wonskolaser and Jacob Leonard Wonsal/Wonskolaser.

The Wonsal/Wonskolaser family came from a "hostile world", where the "night-riding of cossacks, the burning of houses, and the raping of women were part of life's burden for the Jews of the 'shtetl'." (Bob Thomas, Clown Prince of Hollywood: The Antic Life and Times of Jack L. Warner (1990))

Warner Bros. UK Partners With BAFTA On Scholarships; Creates Training Program

Deadline, 26 April 2013

[The Kike's] Warner Bros. Studios Leavesden, the film and TV facility the major owns outside of London, is to be officially inaugurated today during a visit from the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry. At the same time, and in partnership with BAFTA, the studio is announcing the Prince William Scholarships in Film, Television and Games.

Three students per year will receive £10,000 to study a post-graduate course. The studio is also setting up a new training program which it will launch in September.

Warner Bros. Creative Talent will include 12 scholarships; six apprenticeships and two trainee positions on every Warner Bros. film produced in the UK; 25 training course spots at theater company Chickenshed; 20 work experience placements; and five work placements on [Kike] Sam Mendes’ upcoming West End musical, Charlie And The Chocolate Factory.

Warner says the program is part of its “long-term commitment to the UK’s creative industries.” The studio has been in business in the UK for many years and most lucratively with the Harry Potter films, all of which were shot at Leavesden.

Warner purchased the facility outright in 2010 and invested £100M in its expansion. It also houses The Warner Bros Studio Tour London – The Making Of Harry Potter, a behind-the-scenes look at the making of the movies that’s housed just next to the main lot.



The unfounded fear of Muslim immigration

By Doug Saunders, The Globe and Mail, Ideas section, Aug. 25 2012

Eight years ago, when I moved to London to run this newspaper’s European bureau, I found my domestic life unfolding in the epicentre of a cultural upheaval – some were already calling it a civilizational clash – that would dominate the politics of Europe, and then of North America, for years to come.

By that point, my North London neighbourhood had changed. The sidewalks of its haphazard shopping street, Holloway Road, were peppered with women in hijab (and occasionally full niqab) and men in beards and shalwar kameez. Pubs and fish-and-chips shops had been displaced by Turkish kebab houses, money-transfer joints and Internet cafes with opaque Arabic signs.

This had been an immigrant neighbourhood for 140 years, but these latest immigrants attracted more attention. It sometimes seemed as if Islam were everywhere. Our after-school babysitter, a French girl from an Alpine village who had been partial to all-night raves, abruptly converted to the faith of her Algerian friends and took to covering her head and praying five times a day. It made her no less attentive to our children, but more sombre and less willing to eat our food.

Even as my children befriended the Usamas and Leilas in their primary-school classes and the parents of those children became our doctors and shopkeepers, the neighbourhood showed a more ominous face. Our local Muslim house of worship, the Finsbury Park Mosque, was raided by hundreds of police just before my arrival. Its imam – a one-eyed, hook-handed Egyptian-born former mujahedeen fighter who called himself Abu Hamza and was known in the tabloids as “hooky mullah” – was arrested on 16 charges of incitement of murder, terrorism and race hatred after harbouring al-Qaeda activists and delivering sermons calling for the murder of non-Muslims in Islamic lands.

And then, less than a year later, suicide bombs tore through the public-transit system, blowing both legs off one of my neighbours. The attacks were committed by British-born Muslims from Leeds who didn’t appear all that different from some of the guys we saw on Holloway Road.

Given those experiences, who wouldn’t look askance at the new neighbours? The appearance of visibly different immigrants from a minority religion, who tended to be poor and prone to conservative beliefs, was enough of a shock – that their influx coincided with the rise of an extremist political movement obsessed with Western presence in the “land of Islam” and bent on violence made it seem more than just shocking.

For a while, I myself would cast a sidelong glance at the bearded guy on the bus and think, “Could he be one?” I’d look at the packs of children accompanying the covered women and wonder if our values – especially of gender and sexual equality – would someday become a minority creed. For all of us, it was hard not to quietly ask: Were these pockets of violence and radicalism an inevitable extension of these immigrants’ everyday beliefs? Were they all potential extremists, commanded by their religion to resist cooperation and integration? Was it always going to be like this?

A surging ‘Muslim tide’

It was around that time that a new “Muslim tide” argument appeared on blogs, YouTube videos, in newspaper columns and bestselling books, offering an easy “yes” to these questions.

Yes, it said, these immigrants are different from earlier groups. They are driven by their religion, not by the laws and social codes of their new homes. They are reproducing at an unusually rapid pace, with fertility rates far higher than those of exhausted Western populations, and are poised to become a majority. And, yes, that is a danger because they are loyal not to their host society but to Islam, which, as these writers and activists see it, is not so much a faith as an ideology of conquest.

These claims began with obscure blog posts and work by hardcore anti-Muslim activists, but around 2005 they spread to popular books by authors such as Bruce Bawer, Christopher Caldwell and Thilo Sarrazin. Eventually, they also erupted into national politics in a dozen countries.

They turned single-issue politicians, such as the Dutch anti-Muslim firebrand Geert Wilders, into powerful figures. They became a motif in Quebec politics: “Muslim tide” rhetoric lay behind Parti Quebecois leader Pauline Marois’s push to ban Muslim garb, as it did behind Saguenay mayor Jean Tremblay’s declaration that PQ candidate Djemila Benhabib was trying to “dictate how we behave” and impose her non-Christian “rules” on his province.

The “Muslim tide” was a dominant trope in the U.S. Republican Party’s leadership race, with at least four major candidates parroting Newt Gingrich’s line about a secret plot among ordinary Muslims to impose “stealth sharia” on America. This summer, a circle of Congressmen made claims, on no credible evidence, that the most prominent Muslim officials in the U.S. government are somehow tied to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

Perhaps not coincidentally, violent attacks on mosques have increased sharply. And this week, a guilty verdict was handed down to Anders Behring Breivik, who produced the Muslim-tide ideology’s first terrorist atrocity. When he killed 77 people in a truck bombing and shooting spree in Oslo last summer, he left behind a 1,518-page manifesto that explained his act: Most of it was a pastiche of passages by activists such as Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, Gisele Littman and Canadian Mark Steyn – none of whom has ever explicitly advocated violence, but whose visions of a civilizational invasion became his justification for mass killing.

His manifesto also included the words used in his legal defence: “The individuals I have been accused of illegally executing are all … supporters of the anti-European hate ideology known as multiculturalism, an ideology that facilitates Islamisation and Islamic demographic warfare … I must be must be allowed to prove that I executed these traitors in order to prevent them from continuing to contribute to the ongoing process of cultural and demographical genocide and extermination.”

The millions of otherwise moderate and reasonable people who have bought, and sometimes enjoyed, books by the same authors who inspired Mr. Breivik probably don’t believe their more ornate notions of a Muslim-immigrant plot to take over the West. Rather, they are seeking a narrative to explain the simultaneous appearance of Muslim immigrants and Islamic political violence in the headlines.

The Catholic scare

The unease I felt on the sidewalks and buses of our London neighbourhood was not a novel sensation.

If I had lived there a dozen decades earlier, I would have watched the streets fill with suspicious-looking men and women wearing identity-concealing head scarves. Their families were widely believed to belong to an alien civilization. They segregated themselves from the native-born population, were guided by a deeply conservative religion that seemed at odds with modern values, and had the world’s highest reproduction rate. And they were using my neighbourhood to plot a wave of terrorist attacks that killed more Londoners and caused more political alarm than the jihadist attacks of the new millennium.

Today, the Irish Catholics I’m describing are simply part of the neighbourhood’s mix, their pubs and churches an integral part of London’s culture. But for seven decades, Roman Catholics and East European Jews were widely regarded as disloyal, impossible-to-integrate members of an outside civilization. And not just in Britain: If you lived in Canada or the United States in 1950, you would have been aware of a certain type of immigrant seemingly determined to impose their values on their new home – guided by a religion that was not so much a faith as an ideology of conquest.

One of the bestselling books of the period, American Freedom and Catholic Power by Paul Blanshard, argued that Catholic culture is “a survival of mediaeval authoritarianism that has no rightful place in the democratic American environment.” The book was endorsed by Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein, and had great influence in Congress and academia.

In Canada, Italians, along with most other southern European Catholics, were classed as “non-preferred.” One government memo of the time said of the Italian Catholic worker: “even his civilization seems so different that I doubt if he could even become an asset to our country.” Outside of Quebec, it was quite normal to describe Catholic immigrants as an unwelcome and dangerous addition – and their “civilization” probably appeared (and in some ways was) more alien to Anglo-Americans than that of most urban Muslims today.

These statements sound like grotesque religious prejudice today, but to many they seemed well-justified at the time. After all, most Catholic countries had fallen to fascism or religious extremism; Catholic immigrant neighbourhoods were crime-ridden, violent and impoverished; and the worst acts of North American terrorism to that point had been committed by people from Catholic backgrounds. Who wouldn’t look askance at their Catholic neighbours?

We have forgotten this history. And we have forgotten that the same things were said about the waves of East European Jewish immigrants before the war. The phrase “Judeo-bolshevism” was that era’s equivalent to today’s “Islamo-fascism,” and was frequently directed against Jewish immigrants.

Part of this was classic anti-Semitism, but from 1880 onwards there was a new anti-Semitism directed at Jews as immigrant outsiders: They wore odd clothes, were poor and generally illiterate, clustered themselves in self-segregated neighbourhoods, were almost all Orthodox and culturally conservative, were associated in the public mind with crime and radicalism, and were reproducing at a great pace. These seemingly commonsense observations about Eastern Jews soon allowed much of the Western public to blandly tolerate the greatest mass murder in history.

If we want to avoid repeating history, we need to recognize its patterns around us.

And then, the facts

One reason why the “Muslim tide” hypothesis has gone unchecked for so long is because we simply didn’t know much about the immigrants from Muslim-majority countries in our midst. They were too new: Almost half of Canada’s million Muslims, for example, are immigrants, two thirds of whom arrived after 1990.

But the last three or four years have seen a revolution in our understanding of Muslim populations in the West, with a dozen large-scale studies, surveys and projections providing a detailed picture of this minority group – their activities, beliefs, integration patterns and sources of political extremism and moderation. These studies show that many ideas behind the “Muslim tide” (including some held by Muslims themselves) are myth, not fact.

Behind the “Muslim tide” myth lie three core beliefs. First is the claim that their populations are growing so rapidly that Muslims will become majorities everywhere. Because Muslim immigrants tend to come from poor, rural regions prone to overpopulation, they often arrive with large families and have many children soon after settling in their new country. This has created the perception that they will soon swamp countries with low fertility rates.

But this is a gross misinterpretation of what is happening to Muslim populations. Muslim-majority countries are experiencing the fastest decline in fertility and population growth in the world. Witness Iran, the world’s only Islamic theocracy, where mothers had an average of 7 children each in the 1980s; that number has now dropped to 1.7, below the averages in France and Britain (at least 2.1 is required for a country to have population growth). In Turkey, the average has fallen to 2.15 children; in Lebanon, to 1.86; in the United Arab Emirates, 1.9. In Indonesia, home to the world’s largest Muslim population, the family size is about to slip below two children.

This rapid decline in fertility is even more pronounced among Muslims who migrate to the West. Muslims in Canada have on average 2.4 children per family. That’s above Canada’s average of 1.7, but it appears that Muslims born in Canada – that is, the children of immigrants – go on to have only about two children each. And by the next generation, they will be close to the Canadian average.

Claims that Europe will be overrun by a “Muslim majority” are based on similar misreadings. The most comprehensive projections of Islamic populations indicate that Europe’s Muslim population will reach about 7.1 per cent by 2030, at which point Muslims on the continent will be averaging only 2 children per family. The total Muslim population could peak at around 9 per cent, but better education and citizenship policies would make it lower.

Falling fertility rates are a sign of integration: They entail the use of birth control, the empowerment of women and a broadly secular understanding of the world. And they point to a broader (if not universal or consistent) pattern of integration – dispelling a second core belief of the “Muslim tide,” which holds that Muslims are less likely, or interested, in integration than previous groups.

Indeed, a major 2009 study of Canadian immigrants found that skin colour, not religion, is the determining factor in integration: “If anything,” it concluded, “South Asian and Arab and West Asian Muslims report somewhat higher levels of integration than co-ethnics in other religions.”

And while Muslims are currently more conservative on issues such as tolerance of homosexuality and the rights of women, their views are vastly more liberal than in their countries of origin – and tend to align with Western views in the second generation. As far as identifying themselves as Muslims first and Canadians (or Americans or Britons) second, they say this about as much as devout Christians do. And they express loyalty to their home country and its secular institutions at the same, sometimes greater, rates as native-born citizens.

This is not entirely a rosy picture. Muslim immigrants in some places – notably Britain – are lagging behind in cultural integration. Like Jewish and Catholic immigrants before them, they are experiencing pockets of isolation and conservatism, and the economic effects of discrimination and lack of fluency. Anti-semitism and obsessions with the Middle East are far too popular among the second generations in many countries.

But what we see is not a vast historic exception, rather a repeat of the pattern followed by earlier religious-minority immigrants.

Eating kebabs in London

That is all well and good, you might say, but what about the suicide bombers? Islamic extremism in the West remains a serious threat, even if it has diminished from its peak a decade ago.

Here, too, we have a new understanding. A number of very large new studies of the views and motives of terrorists and extremists – including an expansive one by the British intelligence agency MI5 – has confirmed what terrorism experts have long believed: That extremism is a political movement, based on territorial ambitions (specifically, a belief in the inviolate “land of Islam”) not rooted in the religious beliefs of the wider community.

Over and over, we find that those driven to extremism are not very religious and not very tightly linked to their surrounding immigrant communities; they tend to be middle-class loners, often with criminal histories. The most devout, while culturally conservative, are the least politically extreme.

What does distinguish Islamic extremists in the West is their belief that “Islam” and “The West” are distinct and separate entities that should never meet. This belief in a clash of civilizations, ironically, is the one thing that unites Islamic extremists with the “Muslim tide” authors and politicians. Christopher Caldwell, Thilo Sarrazin and Melanie Phillips all express admiration for the strength and coherence of Islamic “civilization” and despair for what they see as an overly secular West. Mr. Breivik was an outright admirer of Osama Bin Laden. And no wonder: What unites the ideologies of al-Qaeda and of the “Eurabia” and “Muslim tide” writers is a common belief that there is one creature called “the Muslim” and another called “the Westerner.”

Yet there is no such distinction. Muslims are adopting the universal values of our society in the same way (not always easy) as other religious minorities.

The shisha bar and the kebab shop are becoming part of Western culture, much like espresso and Yiddish expressions – but there is no threat to our core values.

If we believe that our culture is so weak that it can be threatened by a small group of generally poor and vulnerable immigrants, then what is it worth?

That became apparent in London. I soon realized, as I came to know the Pakistanis and Turks around me, that they and their children are the principal victims of both of these political ideologies. Islamic extremism is a threat to Muslim families. The “Muslim tide” literature, and the distrust it provokes, only amplifies this threat. We need to fight back against both of these dangerous belief systems.


OPINION: Never label political crimes, like Breivik’s, acts of insanity
FAMILIES: The evolving nature of Muslim marriage
RAMADAN: Canada’s geographic quirks pose challenges for fasting Muslims
FACT FILE: Four enduring myths about Muslims debunked



Like it is !!: It's all about preferences, what sort of social fabric do you want. I'm against tolerating the intolerant.

Report Abuse

UH Toronto: Sure. And tell us to drink the cool-aid too. We've seen countless examples of why to fear muslims in Canada. - honor killings - preaching hatred in the mosques - home grown terrorist cells - the subjugation of women in their culture - not adopting Canadian values and using the Charter to force employers to adopt theirs. This isn't the Canada I thought I'd grow up in.

Report Abuse

Comrad K: Lived in downtown Brussels for 6 years. Indeed Muslims can be great people, strong sense of family and friends, very loyal, essentially no different from anyone else in the end - but that is they are the ones who actually respect the West and our beliefs. Then there is the 10% who have no respect for where they are, insult women who don't cover up while walking on the streets, and pick fights with you because you look and act too liberal. Yes, all these things happened regularly. I was totally sick of having these racists insulting my girlfriend and being aggressive with me, so we got the hell out of there and came back here. Make no mistake, we aren't the only ones who can be racist, it's a two-way street and Muslim society and culture in its orthodox state can be pretty damn intolerant! Somehow when screening for immigrants, you have to find the ones who will respect our culture as well, and not look down on us as amoral pork eating alcohol imbibing heathens.

Report Abuse

Wasabi Jones: The rise of Nazism in the 1930's was nothing to fear, either.
Until it was. Also kind of slipped passed the "intellectuals" and media elite at the time.

Report Abuse

Can't believe it: Why Muslim immigration is nothing to fear

Right!!!!! neither is Cancer...until you have it!!

Report Abuse

Yabba-Dabba-Doo: All religion should be feared. People who can convince themselves that there's an invisible man in the sky are very scary indeed. Once you get them to do that, you can get them to do anything.

Report Abuse

Annie Mouse: Keep your head in the sand, Doug. You'll be safe there.

Report Abuse

CanWorms: As a woman, I have a problem with the existence in my community of women who don't have basic human rights - who can't show their faces or bodies in public and who live in polygamy. (I know polygamy is illegal, but there are ways around it, as shown in the recent Tooba Yahya murder trial.) It horrifies me to be near women in the full hijab. The practice is barbaric. I'm not saying we should curtail immigration, but please let's not get so politically correct that we can't talk about this.

Report Abuse

NETNUB: Doug, go and live in Bradford, Rochdale, Wakefield for a year or two and then write your column. And read about the 2nd generation from Bangladesh : www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2193317/My-family-beat-hacked-hair-kissing-white-boy.html Sadly the old prejudices tend to survive the passage of time. As with any ethnic group the process of selection of immigrants is very important and perhaps we can avoid the problems experienced by Europe.

Report Abuse

TomShultz: Show me a country that has 35-45% Muslim population without violence in the streets and calls for Islamic rule.

Report Abuse

tutti frutti: Anyone with any knowledge of the UK knows that this article is full of more nonsense than the usual Saunders rehash of BBC and Guardian PC propaganda.

Report Abuse

walking bear: A couple of years back, 18 Muslim men...young men but nonetheless men, were training north of Toronto near Washago, with guns and devices. They were planning to blow up the CN Tower, kill the Prime MInister of Canada, and to destroy other landmarks and structuresnear and dear to Canada. The title of this article in this paper, would suggest that Canadians are both stupid and void of the ability to remember. MUslims are creating havoc all around the globe, from Indonesia and Thailand, the Philippines, theAfrican continent, London England, Paris France, and always too in their own middle east. They preach their devastation and hatred in their mosques around the world, and are not appreciated as immigrants. They should be rejected as immigrants for their combined terrorist world-wide activities. Their masked and frightening clothing too should be banned here. People moving to Canada need to assimilate, not oppose our culture, our lives, our peace our harmony and our FAITH. Muslims oppose our FAITH. This prejudice Canada can do without.

Report Abuse

northernwriter7: If it hasn't worked in 30 plus years in England, then it probably is not going to work. Races you can mix until the cows come home and have a great country! Cultures by their definition, do not mix. The co-exist Immigrants need not to just accept their new country's culture, they need to adopt it.

Report Abuse

truewest: So you don't really want comments then, unless they toe your politically correct line and are anodyne platitudes because anyone who disagrees will be "attacking" and this will "not be tolerated". Way to foster discussion.

wizardofeaze: Since G & M is looking for respectful thoughtful discussion and comments containing rofanity or attacks on people or groups will not be tolerated. If an overwhelming amount of comments need to be removed, this discussion will be closed. I will not like to voice my opinion but just state obvious facts that G&M cannot dispute. Quran the book of Islam calls for death to infidels (kafirs). Every Muslim who executes this call of Quran directly goes to Heaven and is rewarded with 72 virgins who are 16 years old. Every Muslim is also expected to participate in a religious war against infidels (jihad) whih and for establishment of rule of Shariat as life's mission. According to Quran again a woman should cover herself and not "intice" men to impure thought. However should a man have an impure thought and rape her, her opinion is only half as "weightful" as a man. There have to be at least three male witnesses of rape but even if the perpetrator of crime is found guilty, she will sell be punished because she exposed herself to outsiders. Stoning of the woman is considered an appropriate punishment in such cases. Every country where Muslims are the largest group (dont have to be majority) Islam is state religion and noone can leave Islam. If however a non Muslim marries a Muslim, he automatically becomes a Muslim and all violations of respect to Huzoor Sir Rasolewasallam (the giver of right tradition) should be death under Quranic blasphemy laws. Again G&M only facts as a mark of respect to your board and Muslim friends

Report Abuse

avarava: Islam is totally contrary to everything west stands for. This is a religion which is deeply insecure, has propagated mostly through military conquest and oppression and which discourages creative and free thinking. The funny thing is that muslim people in Islamic countries are desperate to immigrate to western nations. However, once they come here, they work extra hard in making their new home just like their old home which they were so desperate to abandon.

Report Abuse

SecondOpinion64: We don't fear them, we just don't want them as our next door neighbours. Also, we don't want our taxes to fund them instead of funding our schools and hospitals. We built our country to be what it is based on our values and culture. Why don't they build theirs instead of raping ours? Multiculturalism is not working. Look deeper than ethnic festivals and foods.

Report Abuse

scaleworker: This article is Muslim propaganda at its worst. The larger this group becomes in Canada, the more division and resentment will grow. Honour killings, subjecting women to conform in dress and conduct., has no place in my Canada.

Report Abuse

Oahugolf: Yup, nothing wrong with dressing women up in balack bee-keeper costumes, and if they get out of line, just cut their heads off. We'll be the UK before you know it. I presume the author agrees with the Imam at Dundas Square that says women who show skin around men should expect to be raped. You have to love diversity.

Report Abuse

Very Proud Canadian: You are right, Muslim immigration is nothing to fear, but it is desirable? The real question is can Muslims integrate into Canadian society and embrace western democratic principles including the equality of all? Have you noticed that the majority of Muslims are silent when one of their so called radical members commit violence against an infidel.

Report Abuse

Wow. What a propaganda piece. Mr. Saunders. Please go live in Malmo for 6 months. Or Bradford. Or even Brussels. Then try to tell us more about how there's nothing to fear.

Report Abuse

TomShultz: These are the people I fear: __p://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/08/21/iman-sheikh-pakistans-anti-christian-witch-hunt-seen-through-rifta-masihs-arrest/ allowing hundreds of thousands of them to come to Canada is not a recipe for peace and tolerance.

Report Abuse

Boois: 4 pages? What is this the longest article in history? Anyways, I think every country should get a say in who gets to immigrate or if there should be immigration at all. On behalf of Canada, I wish we had restricted immigration to European descendents. Australians, Latin Americans, Europeans, etc. We all have a common background, for all of our differences. But people from Eastern backgrounds are so different in many many ways, and we struggle to find common ground when thrown together in the same country. I have friends who are Asian/Indian etc, but it's not the same. They mostly stick to their own ethnic groups in terms of friendship/family/love. And this multi-culturalism does nothing but dilute whatever culture we had in the first place. I am not even 30 and I already feel like Canada has changed for the worse in my lifetime as a place to live.

Report Abuse

Cocomotion118: Why is the UK (and other EU members) realizing that this ideology doesnt work and will never work but we are so eager to ram it down Canadians throats?

Report Abuse

GK Cheese: Last week my wife was pick pocketed and somehow the individual got her PIN, aided by a great commotion at a Sobey's where one of the scanners suddenly went out of order. It was not insignificant cost to us. Fraud investigators Id'd the person in question wearing a full face covering hijab. This outfit just legitimizes easy disguise to get away with crime as far as I'm concerned.

Report Abuse

Name withheld: This comment has violated our Terms and Conditions, and has been removed.

Report Abuse

Joel Banks: The question of concern, Mr. saunders, is the preservation of the core principles of idealistic Western Civilization in North America against a relentless tide of commercially driven multiculturalism.

Report Abuse

pragmatic 2010: This line of thinking from the G&M is really exhausting. We need to put an immediate stop to the tyranny of muticulti values. It does not work. It will never work.

Report Abuse

rangefinder: Hi Phillipe, I guess you are going to be very busy today removing all the comments that are not to your PC liking.The fact of the matter is that Doug Sanders has no concept of what it is like to live in a no-go area inhabitant by fundamental Muslims. I have. These people to do want to integrate with us. As many of the commentators on this subject (who will no doubt will be removed by you) have pointed out that we are not dealing with a race of people but an ideology that is hell bent to destroy or culture and way of life. If you think female genital mutilation,honer killings,arranged marriages is just another expression of our wonderful Canadian multiculturalism. I invite you to look through the back issues of the paper you work for and see the fate of the Shafia sisters. Whose father was a devout practicing Muslim. Have a nice day.

Report Abuse

Yangtoma1: I don't know why we're always being asked to tolerate intolerant religions.

Report Abuse

Name withheld: This comment has violated our Terms and Conditions, and has been removed.

Report Abuse

Name withheld: This comment has violated our Terms and Conditions, and has been removed.

Report Abuse

Cocomotion118: People who are saying that the reason I specifically am against multiculturalism is because I have no insight into the culture. let me say I was brought up in a hood that represented many different cultures. i was fortunate and my house became know as the "UN" (egyptian, indian, black kids, white kids, you name it we had it). We all got along like brothers....didnt have politics interfering. As we got older my Egyptian buddy told me about the rants and hate filled sermons that were going on inside the mosque. Not all of it, but some of it even made him question its validity and what it would do to less intelligent minds who only knew how to follow and not think on their own. This is what is ACTUALLY going on. Globe and Mail can try to shut down comments all it wants but here in Canada we are finally waking up and do not like what we see. Sorry for the long rant.

Report Abuse

Name withheld: This comment has violated our Terms and Conditions, and has been removed.

Report Abuse

John West: Doug Saunders is one naive MOFO. Islam is a plague on this planet and all one needs to do is look at every singe war, skirmish, conflict whatever ... and on one side, always the aggressors, you find the Muslims persecuting whomever is not them. When the run out of 'others' then quickly start hacking away at each other over the slightest differences in their insane religious beliefs. Listen to many of their leaders, Mullahs whatever ... and you hear the same call to jihad to get rid of Western civilization. More pavilions at folk fest indeed! Doug Saunders is one naive MOFO.

Report Abuse

Name withheld: This comment has violated our Terms and Conditions, and has been removed.

Report Abuse

pie-in-the-sky-when-u-die: Fox in hen-house, the Crusaders were right, we should have learned the lessons of history and not gone down the politically correct path and tried to co-exist; it isn't possible.

Report Abuse

Name withheld: This comment has violated our Terms and Conditions, and has been removed.

Report Abuse

name withheld: This comment has violated our Terms and Conditions, and has been removed.

Report Abuse

Hedplug: If their life and culture is so good in the Middle East, and they clearly continue to propagate their cult's beliefs here in Canada - then, why are Muslims immigrating here?

Report Abuse

tallsox41: Try moving to Scarborough and see the proliferation of new and existing Mosques, then come and talk to me about my fears being "unfounded".

Report Abuse

wizardofeaze: I grew up a non Muslim in the Muslim world. I have lived the horrors of Islam all my life. I have seen Christian woman stoned to death for for complaining she was raped by a Quran tutor (she could not get enough witnesses to prove sex was non consensual but her complaint was itself proof that she had exposed herself in front of men other than her husband against Sharia law). This happened in 2000. I have seen minor girls abducted, raped and forcefully converted to Islam in seminaries and "good Muslims", courts, police and MPs celebrate the great act of converting infidels. I have seem non Muslims being charged taxes (jaziaya) just to be able to live as second grade citizens. I have seen the daily murder, torture and rape that Islam is to non Muslims on a daily basis. I escaped to Canada to escape this inhumanity, this brutality this savage barbarism. Now the same book that preaches this hatred this barbarism this inhumanity towards non Muslims is being taught at schools in York and Toronto with special permission from Toronto school board and with taxpayers money. What happens in my home country will happen here in 20 years if things proceed the same way as they are today. I admonish, I beseech, I request, I humbly beg Canada, the tolerant, law abiding ordinary Canadian to please rise up and save this country before its too late.

Report Abuse

mikjager: I absolutely hate those burqas and I always look these woman right in the eyes sometimes I see sadness and sometimes I see hate. These people do not have the same value systems as North Americans and can not and will not assimilate what they will do is change the laws to suit them and only them. They are not in Canada because they want to be it is that we are the only nation left that will allow them into their nation. Mosques in schools, honour killings, halal only demands, sensitivity laws....go ahead take a picture of one of these people you will be phsyically attacked. Also, let's ban dogs anywhere around a Muslim woman...let's start with a fifty dollar fine and jail for a second offence. Stop the madness. They just don't fit in and we just don't want them.

Report Abuse

IanC2222: Do you ever heard a muslim identify himself as a Canadian? They are muslims first. Their country of origin comes next and Canada just happens to be where they live. The ultimate goal of islam is to establish a worldwide caliphate. The sooner muslim immigration is stopped the better off we'll all be.

Report Abuse

20 years ago, there were no women wearing veil in Montreal. 10 years ago, there were a few,in some ethnic districts, like Cote-des-Neiges. Today, Montreal is most veiled city in North America. You can't bike 5 min in Montreal without seing one. In 20 years, we went from just a few muslims in Québec, to more than 225,000, some 3% of the population, almost half of the Anglos-Quebecers of origins. In Québec city, one third of cabdrivers are muslim. There's now 2 mosques, one on Marie-de-L'incarnation street! Marie de l'Incarnation, the first none in town. Your text is one of the most naive I read for a long time

Report Abuse

E.M: They've ruined Toronto and they're just getting started.

Report Abuse

Name withheld: This comment has violated our Terms and Conditions, and has been removed.

Report Abuse

OGC: This article does it for me. The G&M has gone insane. I discontinued my print subscription after the Inside Hamas articles. Now it is time to forget about the electronic edition too. And time for a new National newspaper in Canada that reports objectively and with depth of thought and research.

Report Abuse

W.S.C.: Unfounded fear. I take a look at Britain, Sweden and France. In Britain, they are too scare of arresting Muslims for hateful threats, because of looking politically incorrect. In Sweden, there are major cities, where police, and ambulances services are literally too scared to enter. In France, crowds of Muslims take over whole streets and disrupt traffic in order to pray and face Mecca. And in addition, there is always the push to adopt sharia law. NO THANK YOU!!!

Report Abuse

sparkalator: Sorry Doug, Im just not buying these main politically correct arguments. Islam has been and is the main enemy of western culture and liberal thinking. History has shown repeatedly that once Islam dominates a region, it takes over. Islam is simply not compatible with democracy. The myth of some parts of Islam being tolerant has been played out time and time again in the last 2,000 years. It's not moderating, it's radicalizing. I see nothing wrong with western culture trying to preserve itself. Its completely Naive to think "progressive" culture will win this one , its not going to if it stupidly presses on diluting our countries with regressive cultures, religions and ideologies. Great enlighten cultures have been destroyed and taken over by ignorant hordes of people time and again. I see the writing on the wall of us here in the west if don't wake up and stem this reversal of what we fought for the last 1,000 years. The notion that we are somehow morally bankrupt because we want to stop inviting people that simply don't or wont fit into what we have built is shear BS. Its naive and its stupid to fritter away what took our cultures a thousand years to socially evolve through. Africa and the ME are decaying into anarchy. Africa is quickly descending backwards into tribalism and chaos, they simply were not ready to become completely modern societies . Even South Africa is nearing the point its about to explode into a bloodbath because its people can't give up old tribal and cultural beliefs that prevent democracy from succeeding. Its not politically correct to point out that these places overall have simply not socially evolved to a point where their societies can accept new ideas like democracy and human rights . they are still dominated by tribalism and stone age practices they refuse to give up. Sure there are people form thes epalces that do fit in, but the truth is that a huge number don't and won't integrate. What utter BS that we can't set some standards of social behaviour for new immigrants. The assumption that all cultures are equal is wrong headed. Where does this notion that we "HAVE" to accept all cultures come from ? I for one don't buy it, its naive ideology. I an in an industry that deals with a lot Muslim immigrant business operators and have been doing so for 20 years. I am not seeing a lot integration and fitting in in that group over time. It worries me because they in general dominate and coerce their children to maintain "racial" purity and holding onto the same values they were trying to escape from.

Report Abuse

Atlas is Shrugging: Most immigrants from Pakistan 25-35 years ago didn't wear the Hijab etc. (look at your old year books), Muslims are just more militant and have even less intention of becoming a real Canadian today....they have regressed....and we continue on excruciatingly.....listening to progressive lunatics handing over our identity to people from the dark ages. Slap a Lefty next time they open their mouths!

Report Abuse

Meatball: Islamization of Ontario schools still part of government agenda: http://waltwhitemansworld.blogspot.ca/2012/04/islamization-of-ontario-schools-still.html

Report Abuse

Devil's Advocate: What a blatant piece of propaganda. I was in London last year in Hyde Park, and an Imam there was preaching on a box. Afterwards I asked him a few questions. "Do Muslims want to replace our laws with Sharia?" He said "every true muslim wants to be ruled only by Sharia". My next question to him was "Do you believe that Muslims who leave the faith should be killed? I've heard it says so in the Koran but want to know from you". His reply - 5 minutes of avoiding and talking circles before saying, "Yes the Koran says that, and I believe it". Non religious muslims are the terrorists? The devout ones aren't? Give me a break. A notion so easily dispelled it's not worth my time even. Read about the London bombers - everyone who knew them said, then suddenly they started growing beards, praying 5 times a day, going to the mosque, getting serious about their religion and whammo - became suicide bombers. This kind of intellectual cringing and fawning is disgusting and comes thru in this propaganda piece.

Report Abuse

Atlas is Shrugging: Hopefully Kenny got the memo to limit immigration from Islamic backwater cesspools. Their religion is the antithesis of anything Canadian.

Report Abuse

Name withheld: This comment was left by a user who has been blocked by our staff.

Report Abuse

Gary_P: Comparisons with Irish or Jewish immiagrants are no valid. Previous immigrants - like Irsh and Jews - understood core liberal Western democratic values like freedom of speech and freedom of religion, concepts which are alien concepts in most Muslim immigrant home-countries. (Remember the Rushdie affair??) The questionis not do Muslims support terrorist violence, but rather do they embrace secular liberal democratic values like the rest of us.

Report Abuse

MichJohnson: People are saying that Saunders has made a good and educated study of this issue. I say that he simply has written a verbose essay pulling cherry picked and distorted facts. The comparison to Jewish immigration is illegitimate, because there have never been enough Jews in the world to overwhelm other societies by immigration, and those that immigrated were overwhelmingly highly educated. The comparison to catholics is inaccurate because there were many Catholic countries that demonstrated progress and advancement (France, Spain, etc), while catholic immigration took place. Further, catholicism was long past its violent years (Inquisition, crusades) during those migrations. And most importantly, all over world, right now, Islam is proving over and over than it cannot co-exist with any other religion - not in Asia, not in America, not in Europe, not in Africa, not even within its own sects, with Ahmadiya and Shia killed in Pakistan, and vice-versa in Saudi Arabia. This religion is fundamentally flawed, somehow. Exactly how is something for debate another time. But I don't see why Canada needs to create this type of trouble for itself.

noub: " ... Unfounded fear .." ? This writer is demented.

Report Abuse

Meatball: How can we be silent in the face of Islamization of our country? http://waltwhitemansworld.blogspot.ca/2012/04/how-can-we-be-silent-in-face-of.html

Report Abuse

johnm6: The writer, Doug Sanders must have written with tongue in cheek. How can he ignore present day reality and the lessons of history. I guess Sanders craves for publicity...if not...get his head out of the sand.

Report Abuse

Name withheld: This comment has violated our Terms and Conditions, and has been removed.

Report Abuse

BlaqueJacqueShallaque: I wonder how much Saudi Arabia paid Mr. Saunders for this article.

Report Abuse

expat canadian: Like Saunders I live in the UK but I am afraid I don't share his views. I was recently working in the east end of London, Beckton to be exact, and it is an area with a large Muslim population. What I noticed about the women wearing the niqab was that many of them spoke with British accents, they wrere born or raised and educated here. If wearing a niqab was a religious requirement I wouldn't mind but as it isn't a religious requirement only a cultural one of the Deobandi sect it bothers me. It bothers me that these women have cut themselves off from the majority. It bothers me that they feel themselves to be superior in some way to me and mine. I bothers me that they will raise their children to reflect these views. The problem with Mr Saunders view is that it is from the liberal left, it does not reflect the feelings of the general population, who rightly or wrongly feel an unease that their culture and way of life is somehow being undervalued. Their children now attend schools where they, the white working class are in a minority and English doesn't even come close to being a second or third language, some schools have over 50 different languages spoken in them. Towns like Burnley are literally divided by a line, the white working class on one side and the Muslim on the other. Bradford has the largest Muslim population in Europe. There are too many incidences of young Muslim girls being kidnapped and married off to cousins in Pakistan to preserve the family wealth or to obtain residency rights. Of so called "honour" killings, a female child, and it is always a female is murdered to preserve a family honour. The corollory to the unavailability of young British Muslim women is that white girls are treated as though they were whores, enticed into becoming sex slaves to frustrated Muslim males. To walk down the street of a largely Muslim area of London as a female is to subject myself to some of the nastiest comments you will ever hear, about my sexual propriety, my lifestyle etc.and I am a woman of a certain age. I am also spat at. There are many Muslims who have immigrated to the Uk and are now into their second and third generation, educate their children in accordance with their beliefs but honour the society in which they chose to live and have made our society a better place. There are also Muslim immigrants who have clung fearfully to the beliefs and lifestyle of their fomer countries, who have no intention of becoming a part of British society, who choose to segregate themselves but they are the squeaky wheels that get the grease, who demand that the greater of society accommodate them rather than the other way round, who are catered to by the liberal elite ( who basically despise their own culture) and who in that process are changing Britain and many of us do not think it is for the better.

Report Abuse

swineman: Look at the riots in France last week, one of the many benifts with Islam. Never made the News here in Canada but many EU leaders have called multiculturalism an absolute failure because of Islam.

Report Abuse

southcoaster: I do not 'fear' immigrants who are muslim. I do not believe however that anyone who comes as an immigrant, should arrive with the expectation that their newly-adopted home will change its laws, customs, society norms, and its culture to accommodate, in this case, muslim, superstitions. Either accept what you find and fit in, of foff. Simple as that. I have several friends who are fairly devout muslims. They go to mosque. They do not sport period middle eastern costume. Their kids to to public schools and are like all the other kids. Their religion is not worn on their sleeves. Oh yeah, and each (there are 6) send us a Christmas card (I've never asked why, we just accept them in the spirit they were sent.) Really,as someone who has lived outside Canada and north America for extended periods, regardless of which set of religous fantasies one adheres to, if you decide to make another country your home, you should neither expect, nor demand that that country change to accommodate your belief system. Otherwise, stay where you are.

Report Abuse

pindybindy: It is absolutely justified. The Muslim/Islamic culture views women as objects, not fully intelligent. They treat women with disrespect. The men dress in Western clothing. The women in immigrant clothing. Keeps them segregated and separate and in their place. The men burn women, murder them, throw acid in their faces and throw them down wells alive. This culture castrates their women (http://www.nocirc.org/symposia/first/badawi.html). These same Muslim/Islamic men come to Canada. They treat and view Canadian women with the same distaste and disrespect. It is absolutely justified in how the West view this culture.

Report Abuse

ringostarr: All one needs to do is educate themselves by reading and researching the Koran, Hadith and Sura to understand Islam and its motives and agenda. This along with some history books and keeping abreast of current global issues. Throughout its 1400 year history Islam has conquered many civilizations and imposed the Sharia. All of North Africa, the Middle East were Christiana, Jews and nomadic peoples. Persia, Assyria as well had a variety of cultures and religions. Islam is a supremest ideology that eradicates all other belief systems and forms of government wherever they take over. This is fact. Look at any map of the world and see where Islam has overwhelmed and continues to in the quest for Sharia. Mr. Saunders lost me when he based his article on cultural/ religious relativism. There is no comparable entity to Islam.

Report Abuse

JPB3137: Sorry, call me what you want. I do not want to be the only non Muslim on my street and I would bet the author of this article would also feel the same way.

Report Abuse

K Morton: It is not muslim immigration we fear or even have a problem with. Rather it is their refusal to integrate with our society. If one wishes to become a Canadian then one should embrace Canadian values and customs, not bring their baggage along and demand that we accommodate them.

Report Abuse

Name withheld: This comment was left by a user who has been blocked by our staff.

Report Abuse

KKJ: Why do you constantly say 'fear when it is really 'dislike'. I dislike women being covered up because muslim men get randy or whatever they say as an excuse. It is insulting to women and really insulting to men. It is not fear - it makes millions of women angry that these muslims contniue to move to freedom and yet cover up, while pushing their customs on the still free western world! A women's body is a beautiful thing and men can handle looking at it.

Report Abuse

rhyham: I said hello to Jesus and goodbye to Muhammad a long time ago. Here is what you missed in your understanding of muslims: They are two faced, in your presents saying what you want to hear and the totally opposite when they sit dow by themselves together. Eighty percent of conflicts around the world today are because of Islamic aggression. What they did to India will be done to Canada 200 years from now. The Koran teaches world domination.

Doug, Have you read and try to understand the Koran and the sex life of Muhammad. Go to Father Zakaria web site. The muslims call him the devil and have a million dollar bounty on his head: www.fatherzakaria.net/

Report Abuse

Cocomotion118: Any comments that are from the heart but disagree with the author of this article are considered hate crimes. Its such a joke. You are entitled to your opinion here, as long as it coincides with the Liberal agenda. And we are the problem? Take a long hard look in the mirror.

Report Abuse

GeeCeeBee: when you look at me, interact with me, speak with me.... uncover your face... it is the polite thing to do and the cultural norm in this country. When you refuse to uncover your face you are figuratively giving me the finger... your saying that here, in my country, your cultural norms trump my cultural norms.... Should you be free to give me the finger? well, the answer is yes... because the culture and norms of my country give you the freedom to give me the finger..... but it begs the question of whether your culture is suited to being transplanted into my country....

Report Abuse

Canadian-Canadian: I have a great intolerance for Muslim women who choose to conceal their faces and therefore identity with the very intimidating niqab. The niqab does create fear.

Report Abuse

Ascalepius: The importation of an intolerant belief system into a relatively tolerant society cannot end well.

Report Abuse

Cincinnatus: The diffence beween Muslims and other immigrnt groups is that the former come here as conquerors, with no desire to "assimilate".




Most Canadians are in favour of restrictions on the number of qualified immigrants accepted into the country each year, a new poll suggests. A survey conducted by Forum Research for the National Post found that 70% of the 1,755 Canadian adults polled supported limits, and most Canadians who were born in another country (58%) agreed. Among those whose parents were not born in Canada, 66% were in support of limiting the number of qualified immigrants over admitting all prospective qualified newcomers, the poll showed.




Globe Mail front page 20130425

Globe & Mail, Front Page, 2013.04.25

How faith built a fragile trust between police, Muslim community


[Photo: Kamran Bhatti, second from right, a Hamilton software developer who has organized five meetings between federal agents and Muslim youth at mosques in the past year, takes part in afternoon prayer in his Hamilton mosque on Wednesday, April 24, 2013.]

A stronger working relationship between the RCMP and Canada’s Muslim community is said to have sparked the investigation that led to arrests in the alleged Via Rail bomb plot. The tips came to Canadian authorities only after they spent years working to rebuild shattered trust.

Relations had reached a nadir around 2006, as the RCMP battled perceptions that its terrorism investigations were misguided exercises in profiling. After that, memos started circulating within the force about how the Mounties needed to change their culture and make some friends.

On Monday, the Mounties summoned about two dozen Muslim community leaders to a police station, thanking them for helping to create an atmosphere in which members of Canada’s Islamic community felt comfortable coming forward with information to thwart an alleged conspiracy by two men accused of planning to derail a train.

Police say the case is evidence that they have crossed a cultural chasm. “There’s been a huge evolution,” Anna Gray-Henschel, the RCMP’s director-general of federal policing strategy, said in an interview with The Globe. “What really impresses me is the courage people have to speak up.”

A civilian with a psychology doctorate who specializes in the softer side of policing, Dr. Gray-Henschel was among the high-ranking RCMP officials who flew to Toronto to brief Muslim leaders, then reporters, on the terrorism bust.

Several of Southern Ontario’s more liberal Muslim figures were at the meeting. But some conservatives came too, acknowledging that they are interested in talking to authorities.

“We’ve been working with RCMP, we’ve been working with CSIS, I mean, not working in a sense, but we’ve been, you know, exchanging … co-operating with them,” Saed Rageah, a Saudi-raised preacher based in Toronto, said after the event.

Police and members of the Muslim community say they have spent years working on projects that have nothing to do with police investigations – “cross-cultural roundtables,” “citizens academies,” police guidebooks, outreach events – as well as many frank conversations held behind closed doors.

All this work may be paying dividends.

“If something were to happen in the country, it’s going to affect us all,” said Kamran Bhatti, a Hamilton-based software developer, who was at Monday’s event. Over the past 18 months, he has invited RCMP and Canadian Security Intelligence Service officers to speak to Muslim youth at a half-dozen mosques and Islamic schools.

The son of a Pakistani immigrant who worked as a parole officer in Canada, Mr. Bhatti feels he is in unique position to facilitate dialogue. Many immigrants, he explains, come from countries where government authorities are corrupt, even brutal. They can pass distrust on to their children, who don’t necessarily understand how Canada’s legal system works, he said.

“It takes two hands to make a handshake,” said Mr. Bhatti, adding that such outreach events were unheard of a decade ago.

At that time, he remembers, judges faulted the Mounties for bungling investigations that led to several Canadians of Arab descent being tortured in foreign prisons. The fallout from these cases led police skeptics to laugh off legitimate busts – such as the thwarted “Toronto 18” bomb plot – as police profiling run amok.

“There really was a deep need to rebuild relationships,” acknowledged Dr. Gray-Henschel, who joined the RCMP’s national security program in 2005.

Today, many Mounties devote themselves full-time to outreach efforts. They are told that this work is not about advancing investigations or recruiting sources – it is simply to make friends and build trust.

Other countries are watching what Canada is doing – in 2010, Dr. Gray-Henschel went to Washington to give U.S. President Barack Obama’s national security staff a briefing on how Canadians try to fight extremism.

Dr. Gray-Henschel avoids any mention of religion in relation to terrorism – “Why would we alienate our friends in the community and then empower our enemies?” – and adds that the RCMP have tried to change their culture.

“You build up trust,” she said. “Then if there is a person that is a problem, they will call us.”

Still, the Mounties sometimes feel they are battling a rising tide. Already in 2013, three young Canadian extremists are feared to have died while perpetrating al-Qaeda-inspired suicide missions abroad – two in Algeria, and one in Somalia. Before killing dozens of innocents, they had been on the radar of Canadian security officials.

Last week’s bombing at the Boston Marathon brought terrorism even closer to home.

Safeguarding national security can be a bit like a being hockey goalie trying to keep multiple incoming pucks out of a soccer-sized net, , Dr. Gray-Henschel said. “Terrorism is the only crime where the expectation that there will be zero incidence of it,” she said.

“And it’s a crime where some people are willing to die while engaging in it ... It’s going to be really hard to stop everything.”

Comments closed

As Canadian Muslims, we must stand up to threats from within

By SHEEMA KHAN, Special to The Globe and Mail, Apr. 23 2013

A few weeks ago, a local community leader shared the disturbing spectre of the rise of the salafist movements overseas in Tunisia and Egypt. Whereas before the salafis shunned all political participation, they took advantage of the post-Arab Spring tumult to forcefully stamp a hardline approach on wider society. Muslims who do not agree with them are labeled as disbelievers. There is no middle ground.

The concern is a spillover of the salafist trend to Muslim institutions here, as the hardliners vie for influence over local communities. Before, they were content to remain insular. And make no mistake – they are looking to bring youth into the fold, away from the decadence of teen culture.

The dizzying events in Boston and the sudden arrests yesterday may seem disconnected at first. In Boston, two young men of Russian origin and raised in the U.S. killed and maimed innocent civilians. In Toronto, two Middle Eastern immigrants in their 30s allegedly planned the same.

Questions remain about the radicalization of the Tsarnaev brothers, while preliminary media accounts suggest that Mr. Esseghaier and Mr. Jaser followed a very strict interpretation of Islam, remaining insular from the wider community. The elder Mr. Tasarnaev and Mr. Esseghaier were vocal in opposing Muslims who did not share their narrow visions. Tamerlan interrupted two Friday sermons at a Cambridge mosque when the imam encouraged Muslims to embrace valuable lessons from Independence Day and Martin Luther King Jr.

Mr. Esseghaier chastised a Muslim co-worker for paying Canadian taxes, and allegedly ripped a charity poster that showed a picture of a woman. While not all those who ascribe to such absolutism are violent, all violent extremists ascribe to this paradigm. The worry is that these views are gaining currency among Muslim youth living in the West.

Such was the concern of the unnamed Toronto imam who alerted CSIS about the extremist influence of Mr. Jaser on local youth. And this is the concern of Muslim communities everywhere: as Muslim youth take a heightened interest in their faith and geopolitics, how do we help them navigate through complex issues as they forge an identity?

Many feel conflicted about a youth culture that emphasizes alcohol, sex and materialism. They long for a path that affirms spiritual impulses. When some decide to observe the faith 24/7, they feel ashamed of their past deeds. Unable to run away from oneself, some do the next best thing by cutting themselves off from all reminders of their past life. But there is also a need for validation, and this is where the nature of the support structure is critical. At this vulnerable stage, support can come from those who affirm the new path, despise the old, and suggest that salvation only lies in armed conflict. Or support can come from those who affirm the new and help youth understand that their Western upbringing is part and parcel of who they are. God forgives and embraces the individual – warts and all. How can one deny past and current blessings, whether it is health, shelter, wealth, education, safety, or freedom to worship? As the Koran states: “All good is from Allah.”

Muslim communities should be commended for working in partnership with our security agencies. A supportive word from the Prime Minister would help. However, more work needs to be done. Muslim youth need safe spaces to frankly discuss issues that matter to them. Let’s help them to channel their energy towards social justice programs, political participation, and even create innovative programs open to all, such as a youth peace corps program.

Terrorists seek to avenge and destroy. We will not let them succeed.

Comments closed


Imam who reported terror suspect to authorities was doing his duty

THE GLOBE AND MAIL, Apr. 23 2013

Representatives of Toronto's Islamic community attend a press conference in Toronto as the RCMP announce the arrest of two men accused of plotting a terror attack on rail target, in Toronto, Monday April 22, 2013. (Chris Young/CP)

It’s good news that a tip from an unnamed Toronto imam is the reason the police were able to foil an al-Qaeda-affiliated plot to derail a passenger train on Canadian soil, and the RCMP were right to make a talking point out of it. It is important to prevent incidents like Monday’s arrests from arousing divisive and harmful prejudices.

On the other hand, we should not go too far in praising the tipster. It is everyone’s civic duty to report a person who poses a threat to innocent people. A balance between gratitude and expectation needs to be struck.

The RCMP took the trouble to invite members of the Toronto Muslim community to a briefing prior to the news conference on Monday at which they announced the arrests of two men in connection with the derailment plot. Participants in the briefing said the police told them they would not have been able to track, and ultimately foil, the plot were it not for the imam who went to authorities in the first place. The community leaders said the police thanked them and urged them to spread the message.

According to imam’s lawyer, the imam became concerned when one of the two suspects in the plot tried to spread extremist propaganda among young Muslims. No one has said what the propaganda was, or whether there was specific talk of a terrorist act, but it was clearly enough to alarm the man, who went to the authorities.

It would be good to know exactly what the imam saw and heard. Radicalism in the Muslim community is an obvious problem that no one should paper over. Canada has produced its share of young, radical muslims who have taken part in, or planned, acts of terror here and abroad. The Muslim community has struggled with this complex issue, but the fact an imam came forward with important information is concrete proof the community is coming to terms with the role it absolutely must play.

Because the bottom line is that every person in Canada who comes across an obvious threat to the public has a duty to speak out.

Canada failed to deport Via terror suspect nine years ago


[Photo: Raed Jaser, 35, was brought into Toronto’s Old City Hall court building in the back of an RCMP cruiser shortly after 8am on April 23, 2013. He faces three charges: conspiracy to interfere with transport facilities; participating in a terrorist organization, and conspiracy to commit murder. (Peter Power/The Globe and Mail)]

Raed Jaser, who is accused of plotting an “al-Qaeda-supported” scheme to kill people by derailing a Via passenger train, was jailed in Toronto nine years ago and facing deportation.

Records show that, in 2004, he had been convicted five times of fraud and had adopted several fake names in the course of his petty crimes.

Federal agents who jailed him on an outstanding deportation warrant argued that, even though he had called Canada home since arriving as teenager in 1993, his criminal record meant that he had to go.

Yet Mr. Jaser, now 35, marshalled a crucial counterargument during his hearing: He was stateless.

And he said Canada could not send him back to his homeland because no country on Earth had ever claimed him.

“I am a Palestinian by blood; that does not give me any rights whatsoever in my place of birth,” Mr. Jaser told an adjudicator at the 2004 hearing, according to a transcript.

He explained that he was born in the United Arab Emirates to migrant Palestinian workers, but that the UAE never gave such people citizenship.

The situation is hardly unique. Federal officials frequently wrestle with thorny questions about how to remove deportees to homelands that choose not to recognize them.

To solve such dilemmas, officials can press foreign diplomats to issue passports for people tied to foreign lands by birth or heritage. But experts say such extraordinary efforts often depend on whether the government views a deportee as inherently dangerous and worth the effort or a tolerable risk to Canada.

Before his fraud convictions, Mr. Jaser arrived in Toronto as part of an Arab family of five who flew in on false passports.

Court records show that Mr. Jaser’s father, Mohammed, sought asylum claiming he had suffered successive waves of persecution: first as a Palestinian when the Israeli state was created; then in the UAE, where he was a migrant worker for 24 years; then in Germany when a racist mob tossed a Molotov cocktail at his family home while they were seeking asylum in Europe.

In Canada, the family got a break – officials gave them immigration status even though they didn’t find the claims persuasive. But Raed Jaser was deemed deportable in 1998 because of his criminal record.

It took government agents six years to catch up with him. In 2004, he was arrested pending a deportation hearing.

At the end of the hearing, an Immigration and Refugee Board adjudicator ordered Mr. Jaser released on $3,000 bail to live with his uncle while pursuing his appeals.

“He is a person who is stateless at this time,” reads the adjudicator’s ruling. He ordered that Mr. Jaser “not engage in any activity that may result in a conviction under an Act of Parliament.”

On Monday, the RCMP charged Mr. Jaser – now a permanent resident of Canada – with three counts of violating the Anti-Terrorism Act. He and a Tunisian acquaintance, Chiheb Esseghaier, 30, are accused of conspiring to commit murder and acts of terrorism under the guidance of shadowy figures in Iran.

On Tuesday, the UAE embassy to Canada circulated a press release stating that both suspects “are not nationals of the United Arab Emirates.”

On Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that Mr. Jaser has flown to the UAE several times on a Jordanian passport.

Comments closed


The Kike Paltrow named "World's Most Beautiful Woman" by The Kike's People mag

The Kike Paltrow named World's Most Beautiful Woman by The Kike's People Mag

Ugly Kike. Last year that other ugly Kike, Mila Kunis, was named "World's Sexiest Woman", by The Kike's Esquire mag.

The list includes 3 ugly Negresses (and Halle Berry, who is good looking, but dumb looking too), and at least 2 ugly Kikes (Paltrow and "Pink").

The most beautiful women in the world are Europeans and East Asians, but Whites are a minority on this stupid, pathetic list, and there are no East Asians at all.


Polynesia Polly

Polynesia Pam

ONNA 121 Voilà

ONNA 119 Freckles そばかす

Locker Mirror 鏡

Redhead 007

Rebel Red


J-Onna 408

J-ONNA 7577


Kotono 琴乃


Mano Erina 真野恵里菜

Mano Erina 真野恵里菜

Risa りさ


Yamamoto Mizuki 山本美月

Natsuko 南津子

Yumi 有美

Haruna 春奈

Kikkawa You 吉川友

Kikkawa You 吉川友

Kikkawa You 吉川友

Kikkawa You 吉川友

Kikkawa You 吉川友

Kikkawa You 吉川友

Kikkawa You 吉川友

Momoko 桃子

Kaho 夏帆

Kaho 夏帆

Kaho 夏帆

YUA 優愛



Under British rule, Palestinian/Jordanian leaders generally welcomed the Kikes into Palestine. The Muslims especially, who welcomed the Kikes as their "cousins".

Mohammed Abdel Rahman Abdel Raouf Arafat al-Qudwa al-Husseini ("Yassir Arafat", "Abu Ammar"; Arafat was his grandfather's name, and Ammar ibn Yasir was one of Muhammad's early companions) was born in Cairo, Egypt.

His father, Abdel Raouf al-Qudwa al-Husseini, was born in Gaza to an Egyptian mother. Abdel al-Husseini brought suits in the Egyptian courts for 25 years to claim family land in Egypt as part of his inheritance, but was unsuccessful.

Mohammed al-Husseini's mother, Zahwa Abul Saud, died from a kidney ailment in 1933, when Mohammad was four. His father then sent him and his siblings to live in Jerusalem. in the Moroccan Quarter of the Old City. They lived there with their uncle Salim Abul Saud for four years. In 1937, their father recalled them to their home in Cairo, where he was raised by his older sister, Inam.

Inam stated in an interview with Arafat's friend and biographer, the English Zionist Alan Hart, that Arafat was heavily beaten by his father for going to the Jewish Quarter in Cairo and attending Synagogue.

In 1944, Mohammed al-Husseini enrolled in the University of King Fuad I (now "Cairo University"). During the 1948 Arab–Kike War, al-Husseini left the university and went to Gaza, where he assisted The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. In early 1949, he returned to his home in Cairo.

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928, as a Pan-Islamic, religious, political, and social movement by Sheikh Hasan Ahmed Abdel Rahman Muhammed al-Banna, a Freemason and an initiate of the Sufi order of Abu al-Hasan al-Shadhili. (Freemason Ivan Aguéli (1869–1917) was the first official moqaddam (representative) of the Shadhiliyya in Western Europe. Aguéli initiated fellow Freemason René Guénon (1886–1951) into the Shadhili tariqa. Guénon established La Grande triade Masonic lodge, which now belongs to the Grande Loge de France (GLDF).)

The Muslim Brotherhood's stated goal is to instill the Qur'an and Sunnah as the "sole reference point for...ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community...and state."

When his Egyptian Mohammadan father died, in 1952, Mohammed al-Husseini did not attend the funeral; nor did he visit his father's grave upon his return to Gaza.

Al-Husseini studied civil engineering and served as president of the General Union of Palestinian Students (GUPS) from 1952 to 1956. During his first year as president of the union, the University was renamed Cairo University after a republican and Masonic coup was carried out by the Free Officers Movement, which overthrew the monarchy.

Al-Husseini graduated with a bachelor's degree in civil engineering and was called up to fight with Egyptian forces during the Suez Crisis (1956); however, he never actually fought on the battlefield.

Following the Suez Crisis, Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser, a leader of the Free Officers Movement, agreed to allow the United Nations Emergency Force to establish itself in the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza Strip, causing the expulsion of all guerrilla or "fedayeen" forces there—including al-Husseini's clique.

Al-Husseini then attempted to obtain a visa to Canada, and later Saudi Arabia, but was unsuccessful in both attempts.

In 1957, he successfully applied for a visa to the British protectorate of Kuwait. There he worked with two official members of The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood -- Salah Khalaf ("Abu Iyad") and Khalil al-Wazir ("Abu Jihad"). Al-Husseini had met Abu Iyad while attending Cairo University and Abu Jihad in Gaza. Both became Arafat's top aides. Abu Iyad traveled with Arafat to Kuwait in late 1960; Abu Jihad, also working as a teacher, had already been living there since 1959. After settling in Kuwait, Abu Iyad helped al-Husseini obtain a temporary job as a schoolteacher.

In Kuwait, al-Husseini and his comrades founded the group that became known as Fatah. The exact date for the establishment of Fatah is unknown. However, in 1959, the group's existence was attested to in the pages of a Palestinian nationalist magazine, Filastununa Nida al-Hayat (Our Palestine, The Call of Life), which was written and edited by Abu Jihad. FaTaH is a reverse acronym of the Arabic name Harakat al-Tahrir al-Watani al-Filastini, which translates into "The Palestinian National Liberation Movement". "Fatah" is also a word that was used in early Islamic times to refer to Muslim "conquest."

In 1990, al-Husseini secretly married Suha Tawil, a Palestinian "Christian" (daughter of Daoud Tawil, an Oxford-educated banker), after she renounced Christ and became a Mohammadan. He was 61 and she was 27. She had been his secretary in Tunis, after her mother introduced her to him in France, where she was the president of GUPS-France. After al-Husseini's death in 2004, Tawil lived in Tunisia (2004-2007), and became a Tunisian citizen in 2006. In 2007, Tunisia revoked her citizenship. She claims her Tunisian properties were frozen. In 2011, the Tunis Court of First Instance issued an international arrest warrant for her, relating to corruption in a 2006 business deal that involved the former Tunisian first lady, Leila Ben Ali. Tawil was, at the time, living in Malta, where she denied reports that she had any money or property belonging to the Palestinian national cause.

Mahmoud Abbas ("Abu Mazen"), born in 1935, has been the Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) since al-Husseini's death in 2004 and became President of the Palestinian National Authority in 2005. Abbas was elected to serve until 2009.01.09, but unilaterally extended his term for another year, and continued in office after that second deadline expired. Abbas was born in Galilee. His family fled from Kike terrorists in 1948, and settled in Syria, where he graduated from the University of Damascus before going to Egypt to study law. He then entered graduate studies at the Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow, USSR, where he earned a Candidate of Sciences degree. The theme of his doctoral dissertation was "The Other Side: the Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism".

Under Kike rule, Fatah now administers The West Bank, while their rival, Hamas, administers Gaza.

Hamas Minister of Interior & National Security Fathi Hammad, on Egypt's Al-Hekma TV, stated that, "Half of the Palestinians are Egyptians, and the other half are Saudis". He also equates "Palestinian" with "Muslim":


'I’m always perplexed as to how heterosexuality happens...’

As she launches a new book of feminist essays, psychoanalyst [KIKE] Susie Orbach explains why a strong mother figure predisposes a woman to be gay

[Susie Orbach: modern mothers 'bring such anxiety to mothering, they’re passing on their own distress with their milk’ Photo: DAVID LEVENE]

By Cristina Odone, BST, 25 Apr 2013

The neogothic gabled houses adjoining Susie Orbach’s Hampstead home were once Anglican and Roman Catholic convents. How fitting. Britain’s most famous psychoanalyst would have been perfect as an abbess – a powerful, independent woman who inspired, governed and sometimes shocked.

Orbach was the first influential analyst to link food disorders to self-image. She has written a number of books, including the seminal Fat Is a Feminist Issue and Bodies. She has co-edited Fifty Shades of Feminism, a collection of essays by 50 different feminists, which has just been published. She was educated here and in New York (her mother was American; her father, Maurice Orbach, a Labour MP), reading women’s studies then psychotherapy. She founded the Women’s Therapy Centre in 1976. Despite this impressive record, most people know the name Susie Orbach because of her relationship with two women.

When Diana, Princess of Wales was battling bulimia, she was photographed in tears, rushing out of Orbach’s consulting rooms. The resulting media frenzy catapulted the psychotherapist into “royal guru” role. Orbach maintained a dignified professional silence throughout.

She observes a similar silence regarding her relationship with Jeanette Winterson, author, most famously, of Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit and Why Be Happy When You Could Be Normal?. For her part, the 53-year-old literary lioness has no compunction about publicising her love for Orbach: “I am in love… and I don’t care who knows it.” She even tweeted a proposal of marriage earlier this year: “Valentine’s Day. Sun shining. Susie Orbach will you marry me? x”

To embark on a lesbian relationship in one’s sixties, after almost 40 years of a heterosexual partnership (and two grown-up children), would constitute a remarkable development for most women. In Susie Orbach’s world view, however, the change of sexual orientation is simply another stage in our evolution: foetus, puberty, childbirth, menopause, post-heterosexual, death… It is a measure of Orbach’s strength of personality that I sit before her, in the book-lined, light-filled consulting room, accepting this thesis. I don’t bat an eyelid when Orbach argues defiantly that: “As a theorist of women’s psychology, it’s always perplexed me how heterosexuality happens.”

Homosexuality is the “natural extension”, for women, “of the first figure of love – the mother… You could say there is a primary for girls to be homosexual, just as there is a primary for boys to be heterosexual, given their own mother love.” In other words, girls are programmed to be gay. “Girls have crushes on girls at school, don’t they? That is undeniably their first experience.”

Susie Orbach certainly looks at ease in her new stage of life. She also looks a lot younger than 67, her figure trim, her curly hair down to her shoulders. Yet not everyone shares her self-confidence. Even today, I hazard, women who come out must face some difficult challenges. An expression of disapproval – the abbess confronting a recalcitrant novice – crosses Susie Orbach’s face: she’d warned me before the interview that as a therapist she could not discuss her own life, and she’s impatient with my clumsy attempt to draw her out. She neatly sidesteps the personal allusion: “Twenty‑five years ago, I’d have said they probably had a lot of internalised prejudice to overcome, but society really has moved on and everyone has kids and relatives who are gay. [It’s] no longer odd.”

Orbach breaks her conversation frequently to ask “What about you?”, “What’s your experience?”, her warm eyes compelling you to “share”. She positively trembles with sympathy and a desire to heal. The arguments may be more circuitous than cogent, but her sincerity burns through. Even the most stony-hearted will succumb to her spell.

Orbach’s latest book, though, fails to cast any such spell. Fifty Shades of Feminism reads like the essays of a not particularly promising women’s studies class. Clunky, self-righteous and hopelessly earnest, they cover well‑ploughed territory – domestic abuse, rape, breasts, men as beasts, porn. The authors plug individual campaigns and personal heroines. They quote one another. They seem to be addressing an invisible right-on bookclub in north London, rather than the world at large. Orbach and her co-editors, Lisa Appignanesi and Rachel Holmes, cannot magic this lacklustre material into a cohesive, let alone enticing, picture of feminism.

I suspect Susie Orbach knows this. When I say the book fails to strike a chord with me, she explains defensively that she and her co-editors had only five weeks in which to assemble their material. I find the authors in Fifty Shades as exclusive as a gentlemen’s club in Pall Mall: no wonder, I argue, that younger women are rejecting the label.

Orbach sighs: “That’s not a recent thing. We moved from feminism to [Shirley Conran’s] Superwoman [her 1975 bestseller], which… said it was all about you, it reprivatised woman’s life. Everything was suddenly about individual accomplishment. Young women grew up with the notion that 'I want to be a star’.”

They still do, as shows like The X Factor prove.

Margaret Thatcher was undoubtedly a “superwoman”, I suggest. Orbach nods: “Her achievement was about 'me’, not 'women’.” Even so, she admits that by dint of being prime minister, Thatcher did change our mindset: “When John Major came to be PM, and stood in front of No 10, a child who was watching the news exclaimed: 'Mummy, you mean that men can be PM?’ ”

Thatcher provided Orbach with an interesting psychological study. “From my perspective, the most powerful figure in the world is a mother. That was what you got with Thatcher. Who’s the one you first fall in love with? A mother. Who first scolds you, restrains you? A mother. She is a fantastically powerful figure.” Thatcher’s Cabinet – almost exclusively posh males – saw her in this light: “A lot of those guys were packed off to boarding school. They saw her as mother: a love object, and erotic object [who] also encoded prohibition.”

It’s a tantalising image, even if it doesn’t match the experience of most mothers today – short-changed by the government and their boss while being under impossible pressure from the media to be “yummy”.

“The government shouldn’t have forced them to go out to work,” Orbach agrees. “It undermines the fact that it is a pretty big job to mother.” But she warns that: “I’ve met a lot of women who have stayed home from high-powered jobs. [They] bring such anxiety to mothering, they’re passing on their own distress with their milk.”

So neurosis contaminates a generation of mothers’ milk? “Well, it’s very hard for them not to be uptight and anxious when they have to see pictures of those women who look like they’ve never had a baby, six weeks on from having given birth.”

Bodies have long been the focus of Orbach’s work. She fulminates against the pernicious way the diet and beauty industries have taught consumers that a good body is an “accomplishment you work at” by slimming, exercising, tanning, waxing, and endless beauty balms and dyes. This notion is so pervasive, our children have absorbed it.

“They are brought up with the idea that bodies are things that are to be made, not to be lived in. Girls of five or six are playing games [such as The Secret World], where they can get plastic surgery tokens to get their nose or breasts… changed. There are children out there for whom there are no real photos – because they’ve all been photoshopped to perfection.”

In other words, parents are cooing over photographs of perfected, rather than perfect, children. “It’s tragic,” Orbach agrees. “When my daughter, now 24, was at school, there was the first case of a girl of nine throwing up in school. It’s now starting from [age] five and six.”

She has no doubt that our anguished body image affects our sexuality. “I think we still don’t understand what sex is, what sex does, and what sex means. Girls are encouraged to see sexuality, instead of something inherent, as an accomplishment. It’s become a performance.”

She blames commercial pressure for this. “We are seeing a massive assault by those industries who grow rich by breeding insecurity. The diet industry is so huge, it would be easier to take on the tobacco industry. The beauty industry is half the size of the steel industry.”

She urges parents to let children “enjoy their appetites, see life as an adventure, be curious. Above all, talk, talk, talk.” She sees a role for government here. “I think emotional literacy needs to be integrated much more, it’s another one of the three Rs. We should have feelings taught in school, as part of the syllabus. We should have questions like: 'Is that the real feeling, or the feeling behind it?’ It’s an essential part of learning and should be introduced at primary school.”

Our interview is over. As I gather up my things, I still feel under her spell. Once home, I realise what the magic involves. It’s her sheer ability to listen. Curiosity about others is highly unusual – in a high-profile figure, it is unheard of.

'Fifty Shades of Feminism’, edited by Lisa Appignanesi, Rachel Holmes and Susie Orbach (Virago), is available from Telegraph Books for £10.49 + £1.35 p&p.

The site has blocked you from posting comments.

NB, "Anorexia" is a kike invention.


NJ pro-Israel PAC raises funds for Cory Booker

In Englewood, donors give $100,000 toward possible Senate run

[Photo: Newark Mayor Cory Booker, center, with NORPAC president Ben Chouake, left, and member Moshael Straus. ]

By Robert Wiener, New Jersey Jewish News, April 24, 2013

A pro-Israel PAC fund-raiser for Newark Mayor Cory Booker brought in $100,000, even though Booker has not yet made his intentions to run for United States senator in 2014 official.

The April 21 fund-raiser at a private home in Englewood was hosted by NORPAC, a nonpartisan PAC that backs pro-Israel congressional candidates.

Its president, Ben Chouake, said 40 people attended the event, where the 43-year-old mayor spoke to “our key concern, Iran.”

“He is a supporter of foreign aid and America’s partnership with Israel, and he talked specifically about Iran, saying it was extremely important that America prevent this terrible danger [of Iranian nuclear attack] from happening,” said Chouake, in a phone interview a day after the gathering.

The event was off-limits to reporters, but Chouake said the Democratic mayor of New Jersey’s largest city was especially popular among Jewish suburbanites.

“He is very well versed in Jewish customs and Jewish history and is deeply engaged with the community — not just going to a synagogue or a Holocaust memorial. On a weekly basis he has been deeply committed for 15 years, and you’ve got to consider it to some extent genuine. He has a proven track record with our community,” Chouake said.

Rep. Frank Pallone (D-Dist. 6) is a potential rival to Booker in the Democratic race to succeed retiring Sen. Frank Lautenberg. Should he run, he would be able to transfer the $3.4 million raised for his House campaign to a Senate committee, according to USA Today.

But NORPAC’s Chouake said Pallone has not declared nor has he committed to a Senate run. “He has asked us to do an event for him” when he runs for another term in the House, said Chouake.

Booker’s supporters include Hollywood movie moguls such as Ron Howard, J.J. Abrams, Jerry Weintraub, and Rob Reiner; New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg; basketball player Jason Kidd; and businesswoman Ivanka Trump, the daughter of Donald Trump and daughter-in-law of New Jersey builder Charles Kushner.

“A race for a U.S. Senate seat in New Jersey will cost $25 to $30 million,” said Ben Dworkin, director of the Rebovich Institute for NJ Politics at Rider University. “You have to buy New York television advertising, which is the most expensive in the country, and it only covers half the state. You also have to buy airtime in Philadelphia, which is the fourth-most-expensive media market in the country.

“How do you raise that? It helps to have supporters all over the country.”

Dworkin agreed that Booker, who famously headed a Jewish student group while a student at Oxford University in England, has cultivated considerable Jewish support.

“He is popular among the Jewish community because he is pro-Israel and has a strong sensitivity to Israel’s challenges,” said Dworkin. “He is a key player, and folks in NORPAC want to make sure they have a good relationship with him.”

Asked whether Republican as well as Democratic NORPAC members might support Booker for senator, Chouake said, “I don’t know how people vote, but I think he is palatable to our members. People like a moderate Republican or a moderate Democrat; most of our membership is in the middle.”

As an African-American, Booker is a positive force for NORPAC’s cause and its constituency, said Chouake.

If elected, “other than the president, he will be one of the highest black officials in America,” said Chouake. “That immediately thrusts him into national leadership.”

African-Americans tend to be less supportive of Israel than the population at large, polls suggest.

Chouake said he doesn’t know if Booker “speaks to the black community on our issue but he has their ear, and he certainly deserves it. If he does, I am grateful for it.”

The NORPAC official said he was especially impressed by a story Booker related at the gathering. He said that during President Barack Obama’s visit to Yad Vashem last month, Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau, the former chief Ashkenazi rabbi of Israel and child survivor of Buchenwald, told the president the words of the U.S. soldier who arrived to liberate the concentration camp: “We came too late.”

“We cannot be too late for this,” said Booker, echoing the rabbi’s words as he warned of Iran’s possible nuclear intentions.



The Kike Levin and Kike Marc Benjamin's "Brick City" is a "ground-breaking" docu-series about the sewer-city of Newark, New Jersey, its Kike Zuckerberg & Oprah-funded Negro Rhodes Scholar Kike mayor, Cory Booker, "and the people on the frontlines of a city struggling to change." The 5-hour kike-series aired its first Peabody Award-winning season on the Sundance Channel. The show also received a 2010 Golden Eagle Cine Award and was nominated for both an Emmy for Exceptional Merit in Nonfiction Filmmaking and a Kike NAACP Image Award.



Kike Alan Shatter lords over the Irish


Psychiatrists say they don't want to take part in assessment panels

Eilish O'Regan and Fionnan Sheahan, The Irish Independent, 25 April 2013

A group of almost 70 psychiatrists will this morning tell TDs and senators they are "deeply concerned" at the Government's plan to legislate for abortion where there is a threat of suicide.

Adding to the reservations from psychiatrists on the legislation, a statement calling for any proposal to be based on a "rigorous appraisal of the available psychiatric research and medical evidence" was also signed by 68 members of the profession.

"We believe that legislation that includes a proposal that an abortion should form part of the treatment for suicidal ideation has no basis in the medical evidence available.

"We as psychiatrists are being called upon to participate in a process that is not evidence-based and we do not believe that this should be asked of the profession," the statement said.

The statement originated from a letter to colleagues sent by psychiatrists Dr Bernie McCabe, Dr Jacqueline Montwill, Dr Richelle Kirrane and Dr Martin Mahon.

Perinatal psychiatrist Dr Anthony McCarthy, of the National Maternity Hospital in Holles Street, Dublin, said forcing psychiatrists to participate in this kind of system was an abuse of their profession.





Ireland assumed the Presidency of the Council of the European Union on 2013.01.01.

The Kike Shatter, 2013.04.19:

“The first quarter of 2013 has been a busy and productive period in the areas of justice, home affairs, equality and defence. Working closely with Member States in partnership with the Commission and the European Parliament, some notable achievements have already been delivered. The mid-way point in our Presidency is a good time to take stock, review our progress and renew our commitment to deliver on Ireland’s priorities by the end of June. “I am very pleased with Ireland’s achievements during the Presidency so far. Through our efforts the rights of victims and asylum seekers have been significantly enhanced. Ireland has also been instrumental in improving law enforcement access to vital data through the implementation of SIS II."

The Kike Shatter's office listed his "main achievements" as President of the Council of the EU:

"Enhancing fundamental rights in the EU has been a key focus of Ireland’s Presidency in the area of justice and home affairs. At the Informal meeting of Justice Ministers in Dublin in January, chaired by the Minister, Minister Shatter initiated a debate with his Ministerial colleagues on the issue of tackling hate crime, xenophobia, racism and anti-Semitism.

"Ministers agreed the implementation date for the second generation of the Schengen Information System (SIS II) in March. The system went live on 9 April, connecting 28 participating States and facilitating for the first time the exchange of biometric data as part of the Schengen alert system.

"Breakthrough was reached with the European Parliament on the final two legislative measures forming part of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). The completion of the CEAS will be an important milestone towards ensuring that the Union has a fair and effective system for processing asylum applications that is also robust and not open to abuse.

"In a major address on 22 January at the International Holocaust Remembrance Day ceremony in the European Parliament, Minister Shatter - the first Chair of the Justice and Home Affairs Council to address this event - stressed the need to take action under the Rule of Law to end intolerance, racism and anti-Semitism."



Published for the first time today by the Institute for Economics and Peace


Most Peaceful
  1. Broadland, Norfolk (98.8% White)
  2. Three Rivers
  3. South Cambridgeshire
  4. East Dorset
  5. Maldon
  6. Hart
  7. Craven
  8. Mid Sussex
  9. East Cambridgeshire
  10. Wokingham
  11. Ribble Valley
  12. Rochford
  13. Purbeck
  14. Horsham
  15. North Kesteven
  16. Rushcliffe
  17. Vale of White Horse
  18. Sevenoaks
  19. Rutland
  20. West Lindsey

Least Peaceful (i.e., Most Dangerous)


59% White, 30% Black (was 21% Black in 2001)

15th most ethnically-diverse local authority in England, but with a higher percentage of Negroes than other, more ethnically-diverse places

London Lewisham 1920

London Lewisham 21C


54.0% White British, 2.7% White Irish, 9.0% Other White, 1.8% White & Black Caribbean, 0.7% White & Black African, 0.9% White & Asian, 1.2% Other Mixed, 2.3% Indian, 1.1% Pakistani, 1.0% Bangladeshi, 0.9% Other Asian, 10.2% Black Caribbean, 9.6% Black African, 1.8% Other Black, 1.3% Chinese, 1.3% Other

London Lambeth 1950

London Lambeth 21C


47.1% White British, 2.6% White Irish, 11.2% Other White, 1.6% White & Black Caribbean, 0.8% White & Black African, 0.8% White & Asian, 1.2% Other Mixed, 4.1% Indian, 1.4% Pakistani, 2.8% Bangladeshi, 1.0% Other Asian, 9.2% Black Caribbean, 10.8% Black African, 2.2% Other Black, 1.4% Chinese, 1.9% Other

London Hackney 1970

London Hackney 21C


29.0% White (16.7% White British, 0.7% White Irish, 0.2% Gypsy or Irish Traveller, 11.4% Other White), 4.6% mixed race (1.3% White and Black Caribbean, 1.1% White and Black African, 0.9% White and Asian, 1.3% Other Mixed), 43.5% Asian (13.8% Indian, 9.8% Pakistani, 12.21 Bangladeshi, 1.3% Chinese, 6.5% Other Asian), 19.6% Black (12.3% African, 4.9% Caribbean, 2.4% Other Black), 1.1% Arab, 2.3% Other.

Newham has the HIGHEST FERTILITY RATE in the U.K., at 2.87, as of 2009, compared to the national average of 1.95

London Newham 1927

London Newham 21C


46.9% White British, 1.4% White Irish, 8.0% Other White, 0.8% White & Black Caribbean, 0.4% White & Black African, 0.9% White & Asian, 0.7% Other Mixed, 3.3% Indian, 1.5% Pakistani, 22.1% Bangladeshi, 4.5% Other Asian, 2.3% Black Caribbean, 3.6% Black African, 0.5% Other Black, 1.6% Chinese, 1.5% Other

London Tower Hamlets 1920

London Tower Hamlets 21C


59.8% White British, 3.9% White Irish, 14.4% Other White, 1.1% White & Black Caribbean, 0.6% White & Black African, 1.1% White & Asian, 1.0% Other Mixed, 1.9% Indian, 1.2% Pakistani, 0.8% Bangladeshi, 1.3% Other Asian, 4.4% Black Caribbean, 4.4% Black African, 0.9% Other Black, 1.1% Chinese, 2.0% Other


58.4% White British, 4.5% White Irish, 12.3% Other White, 1.2% White & Black Caribbean, 0.7% White & Black African, 1.1% White & Asian, 1.2% Other Mixed, 2.2% Indian, 0.8% Pakistani, 2.3% Bangladeshi, 1.0% Other Asian, 4.2% Black Caribbean, 5.2% Black African, 1.0% Other Black, 2.3% Chinese, 1.7% Other


52.6% White British, 2.6% White Irish, 9.1% Other White, 1.2% White & Black Caribbean, 0.8% White & Black African, 0.7% White & Asian, 1.1% Other Mixed, 2.6% Indian, 0.6% Pakistani, 1.6% Bangladeshi, 0.9% Other Asian, 6.9% Black Caribbean, 13.3% Black African, 1.7% Other Black, 2.6% Chinese, 1.6% Other


30.9% White British, 5.7% White Irish, 9.4% Other White, 1.0% White & Black Caribbean, 0.7% White & Black African, 1.1% White & Asian, 1.1% Other Mixed, 18.1% Indian, 4.3% Pakistani, 0.6% Bangladeshi, 4.8% Other Asian, 9.4% Black Caribbean, 7.7% Black African, 1.4% Other Black, 1.3% Chinese, 2.6% Other


47.6% White British, 3.6% White Irish, 14.1% Other White, 1.4% White & Black Caribbean, 0.8% White & Black African, 1.2% White & Asian, 1.3% Other Mixed, 3.0% Indian, 1.3% Pakistani, 1.6% Bangladeshi, 1.7% Other Asian, 8.3% Black Caribbean, 9.1% Black African, 1.3% Other Black, 1.5% Chinese, 2.2% Other


53.5% White British, 2.1% White Irish, 7.6% Other White, 1.4% White & Black Caribbean, 0.7% White & Black African, 0.9% White & Asian, 1.0% Other Mixed, 3.7% Indian, 7.7% Pakistani, 1.2% Bangladeshi, 2.3% Other Asian, 7.7% Black Caribbean, 6.4% Black African, 1.4% Other Black, 0.9% Chinese, 1.5% Other


49.0% White British, 2.8% White Irish, 19.4% Other White, 0.8% White & Black Caribbean, 0.7% White & Black African, 1.5% White & Asian, 1.4% Other Mixed, 4.8% Indian, 1.4% Pakistani, 2.3% Bangladeshi, 2.1% Other Asian, 2.5% Black Caribbean, 3.4% Black African, 0.7% Other Black, 3.2% Chinese, 4.1% Other


66.7% White British, 1.9% White Irish, 5.6% Other White, 1.1% White & Black Caribbean, 0.5% White & Black African, 0.7% White & Asian, 0.7% Other Mixed, 4.3% Indian, 1.1% Pakistani, 0.8% Bangladeshi, 1.3% Other Asian, 3.1% Black Caribbean, 8.5% Black African, 0.8% Other Black, 1.5% Chinese, 1.2% Other


45.5% White British, 3.9% White Irish, 9.5% Other White, 1.0% White & Black Caribbean, 0.5% White & Black African, 1.3% White & Asian, 1.0% Other Mixed, 15.0% Indian, 3.9% Pakistani, 0.5% Bangladeshi, 3.9% Other Asian, 4.0% Black Caribbean, 4.1% Black African, 0.6% Other Black, 1.4% Chinese, 3.8% Other


59.8% White British, 1.9% White Irish, 4.8% Other White, 1.5% White & Black Caribbean, 0.5% White & Black African, 1.1% White & Asian, 1.0% Other Mixed, 7.5% Indian, 2.6% Pakistani, 0.6% Bangladeshi, 2.3% Other Asian, 7.9% Black Caribbean, 5.6% Black African, 1.1% Other Black, 0.8% Chinese


52.4% White British, 3.5% White Irish, 15.7% Other White, 0.8% White & Black Caribbean, 0.6% White & Black African, 1.2% White & Asian, 1.3% Other Mixed, 3.6% Indian, 0.9% Pakistani, 5.7% Bangladeshi, 1.2% Other Asian, 1.6% Black Caribbean, 5.1% Black African, 0.5% Other Black, 2.7% Chinese, 3.1% Other


72.8% White British, 1.5% White Irish, 3.9% Other White, 1.0% White & Black Caribbean, 0.5% White & Black African, 0.4% White & Asian, 0.5% Other Mixed, 2.8% Indian, 2.2% Pakistani, 1.1% Bangladeshi, 1.0% Other Asian, 2.4% Black Caribbean, 7.6% Black African, 0.5% Other Black, 0.9% Chinese, 1.3% Other


66.7% White (59.3% White British), 4.7% Mixed Race, 17.1% British Asian (12.1% S.Asian, 2.7% Chinese), 3.1% Other, 8.6% Black British


57.9% White (53.1% White British), 25.4% South Asian, 8.9% Black, 4.4% Mixed Race, 1.2% Chinese, 2% Other


67.9% White British, 2.5% White Irish, 4.8% Other White, 0.7% White & Black Caribbean, 0.4% White & Black African, 0.9% White & Asian, 0.7% Other Mixed, 10.0% Indian, 1.8% Pakistani, 0.7% Bangladeshi, 2.3% Other Asian, 1.5% Black Caribbean, 3.1% Black African, 0.3% Other Black, 1.1% Chinese, 1.4% Other


Most Peaceful
  1. Orkney Islands
  2. Aberdeenshire
  3. Moray
  4. Shetland Islands
  5. Dumfries & Galloway

Least Peaceful
  1. Glasgow City
  2. West Dunbartonshire
  3. Renfrewshire
  4. North Ayrshire
  5. Inverclyde


Most Peaceful
  1. Castlereagh
  2. Ballymoney
  3. Magherafelt
  4. Armagh
  5. Moyle

Least Peaceful
  1. Belfast
  2. Foyle
  3. Coleraine
  4. Cookstown
  5. Antrim



Dropped Gosnell Charge Was of Newborn Tossed in Shoe Box, Still Breathing

By Steven Ertelt | LifeNews.com | 4/23/13

As LifeNews reported today, the judge in the Kermit Gosnell murder trial dropped three murder charges related to babies he killed in his horrific abortion-infanticide process.

One of the three charges the judge dropped includes a 28-week unborn baby who was killed in an abortion-infanticide and eventually discovered in a freezer at Gosnell’s clinic.

LifeNews has identified that another charge involved “Baby B,” about whom a Gosnell staffer testified was a newborn child who survived a failed abortion and was still breathing into a shoe box.

Kareema Cross told the jury she saw at least 10 children who were breathing after botched abortions but killed afterwards. What happened shocked her so badly she took photographs to document what happened. Cross took pictures to document filth in the abortion clinic and a picture of a huge baby boy tossed in shoe box breathing, moving, and too big for the box. Cross testified of large babies birthed, moving, and moaning some for 20 min before their necks were snipped.

Gosnell gave the unborn children digoxin not to kill baby but slow heart, Cross said. Gosnell’s attorney claims the drug killed the unborn children before birth and before he snipped their necks.

But one pro-life advocate who has been following the trial closely says the charge should not have been dismissed.

“I am shocked that these counts have been dismissed. I have heard testimony by very credible witnesses to the effect that these babies were murdered in cold blood by Gosnell as they cried and struggled for life. We pray that justice will be done in the remaining five victims of Gosnell’s horrific slayings,” said Cheryl Sullenger, Senior Policy Advisor for Operation Rescue, who has observed the trial and published first-hand accounts of the proceedings.

Sullenger said testimony from the medical examiner and toxicologist has indicated that there was no evidence the babies were injected with Digoxin to ensure the babies were dead prior to the abortion, as the defense has claimed.

The medical examiner testified that tests were inconclusive as proof that the babies were born alive. However, the tests also did not prove the babies were dead prior to birth. Those inconclusive test results were overshadowed by the weight of testimony from witness after witness, who detailed how the babies were in fact living prior to being murdered through what one witness described as a “virtual beheading.”

“If Gosnell gets off scot-free, that will send a message that murdering live babies and abortion patients is now acceptable behavior in America and that abortionists who engage in such depraved practices are above the law. This would put women and babies in grave danger – more than they already face – at abortion clinics throughout the nation,” said Sullenger.

From the testimony Cross gave during the trial:

In the final day of the prosecution of former abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, a former staffer testified that she saw at least 10 babies breathing, which were delivered at Gosnell’s West Philadelphia clinic, before Gosnell or another staffer ended their lives by cutting their spinal cord with scissors.

Kareema Cross told a jury that she was so unnerved by this and other things she saw at Gosnell’s West Philadelphia clinic between 2005 and 2009 that she took pictures to document the filthy conditions.

Cross, under questioning from Assistant District Attorney Joanne Pescatore, told the jury she saw at least 10 to 25 instances where babies – delivered by abortion patients after receiving labor-inducing drugs – were breathing and vividly recalled a few instances where she saw movement.

In another instance, Cross recalled when Lynda Williams, a Gosnell staffer who lived in Delaware, had a child that had been delivered by a patient and saw it breathe. “The chest was going up and down” she said.

“Lynda pulled its hand and the baby pulled the arm back,” she said, adding a short time later Williams flipped the child over and “snipped” the spinal cord with a pair of scissors.

Williams, in her testimony earlier this month, testified only that she saw the baby’s arm “jump” when she cut the spinal cord.

On a different occasion, Cross said she heard a baby cry out. She said a co-worker who heard it first came to get her and she listened at the door, where the baby’s body was, and heard “mmm…. A whine, a soft whine, once.”

During the trial Gosnell’s defense lawyer, Jack McMahon, claims none of the babies were born alive who Gosnell killed in abortion-infanticide procedures but were dead before birth due to a lethal drug injection and that Gosnell and his staff “snipped” their necks after “birth.” McMahon claims no babies were ever killed in the gruesome abortion process, which involved “snipping” the spinal cords of the children by jabbing medical scissors into the backs of their necks, because the babies were supposedly already dead.

That’s not what two staffers for Gosnell admitted in court — with one saying she heard a baby scream and another saying the baby “jumped” when the newborn was stabbed in the neck with the scissors.

McMahon is attempting to get the jury to buy a story that Gosnell used a drug called Digoxin to kill the baby in utero and then to deliver a dead child. He claims Gosnell just wanted to “snip” the spinal cords to ensure the baby was dead already. The Gosnell staffer admitted that’s what the abortion practitioner told her he was doing.

Although the defense attorney claimed the babies were dead and that jabbing them in the neck with scissors was needed to make sure that was the case, Gosnell staffers also told the court one at least two occasions that the babies were not dead when their necks were stabbed.

Gosnell Judge Reinstates Charge for Baby Tossed in Shoe Box, Still Breathing

By Steven Ertelt | Philadelphia, PA | LifeNews.com | 4/24/13

The judge in the Kermit Gosnell murder trial admitted today he made an error when dropping one of the charges against the abortion practitioner.

Common pleas court Judge Jeffrey Minehart admitted he “erred” when dropping the murder charge for Baby C, who was killed in an abortion-infanticide when he was a victim of an attempted abortion but was born alive and tossed in a shoe box, with Gosnell staffers confirming they saw him breathing for 20 minutes.

Gosnell faces eight total murder counts — one for killing a woman in a botched abortion and seven for killing babies in abortion-infanticides that involved live-birth abortions and snipping their necks after birth. The judge received heavy criticism yesterday for dropping three of the murder charges.

Gosnell’s defense attorney asked the judge to drop three of the charges for killing the babies and the judge agreed with the contention there was not enough evidence to convict Gosnell on those charges. Another charge of infanticide was also dropped. He still faces the other charges the prosecution has brought and the murder trial will continue on them.

One of the three charges the judge dropped includes a 28-week unborn baby who was killed in an abortion-infanticide and eventually discovered in a freezer at Gosnell’s clinic. Another involved “Baby B,” about whom a Gosnell staffer testified was a newborn child who survived a failed abortion and was still breathing into a shoe box.

The third murder charge thrown out was for “Baby G,” who was the subject of testimony of a former Gosnell staff who, in the grand jury report, said he saw alive. Steven Massoff said he saw exhibit “a respiratory excursion,” meaning a breath.

The reinstated charge involves Baby C — about whom a Gosnell staffer testified was a newborn child who survived a failed abortion and was still breathing into a shoe box.

During this morning’s trial hearing, Judge Minehart also dismissed murder charges regarding”Baby F,” who was seen by Gosnell staffers making a single leg movement after birth and before Gosnell employees snipped the infant’s neck.

President Obama Backs Out of Planned Parenthood Fundraiser Speech

By Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 4/24/13

President Barack Obama has backed out of giving a keynote speech at a Planned Parenthood fundraiser on Thursday night after massive pro-life pressure.

As the Washington Times reports:

"White House spokesman Jay Carney announced the decision to cancel the keynote speech at the gala during his daily press briefing with reporters Wednesday. He attributed the schedule change to Mr. Obama’s desire to spend more time at a memorial service in Waco, Texas, for family members of the victims of the fertilizer plant explosion.

"Mr. Carney said the president will still address Planned Parenthood and its supporters Friday morning. Still, the shift to a lower-profile address at a more low-key morning event, rather than an evening gala fundraiser, is significant."

Obama was slated to speak at Planned Parenthood’s fundraising gala on Thursday night and with the Kermit Gosnell trial capturing national attention there was significant backlash. Obama has thus far refused to comment on the trial — despite the fact that he has commented on other trials in progress previously.

The pro-life Susan B. Anthony List responded to the news that President Obama is backing out of the keynote address at Planned Parenthood’s annual fundraising dinner, saying he is running away from the abortion giant:

“Planned Parenthood last week admitted to knowing about the horrors going on inside Kermit Gosnell’s squalid Philadelphia clinic, but chose not to exercise its position as the leader in the abortion industry to put an end to the butchering of women and children. No matter the reason for his backing out, it is certainly a good time to distance oneself from Planned Parenthood. Now is also a good time for President Obama to reconsider his position of forcing taxpayers to fork over more than $542 million each year to this abortion-centered, profit-driven business. Planned Parenthood is America’s largest abortion provider which in a single year ended the lives of more than 333,000 children,” SBA’s Marjorie Dannenfelser said.

She added: “Planned Parenthood cannot claim that the Gosnell ‘house of horrors’ was an isolated incident as their own employees exposed them earlier this month for ‘ridiculously unsafe’ clinic conditions and ‘meat-market style of assembly line abortions,’ in Delaware. That came after news last month that Planned Parenthood lobbied against a bill designed to protect babies born alive after abortion from the cruel death offered by Gosnell.”

Lila Rose, the head of the pro-life group Live Action, which has exposed Planned Parenthood arranging abortions for victims of sex-trafficking and misleading women about the risks and dangers associated with abortions, called for the cancellation.

She released the following statement to LifeNews:

“In the wake of the gruesome and horrific revelations emanating from the trial of abortion Doctor Kermit Gosnell, we urge President Obama to cancel his fundraising speech for big abortion giant Planned Parenthood on Thursday night.

“Planned Parenthood is the nation’s number-one abortion provider, having received in 2011 (the latest year with available data) a record $542 million in tax dollars under the policies of the Obama administration. Over the past few weeks, we have heard the brutal details of the slaughter of innocent human beings that goes on within the walls of many abortion clinics, including Gosnell’s ‘House of Horrors’ in Philadelphia and the ‘meat-market’ ‘assembly-line’ Planned Parenthood of Delaware.

“These accounts by former clinic staff have shell-shocked the nation and it is incumbent upon the President to reconsider his support for the abortion industry and Planned Parenthood, which last year profited from abortion $87 million dollars committing over 300,000 abortions.”

The nation’s biggest abortion business heaped praise on President Barack Obama calling him the most pro-abortion president ever.



Propaganda bringing about and assisting the death of the British Empire and our own national suicide (throughout the West) courtesy of our MSM.

Thankfully for those concerned with the 'British' media's bent on anti-white programming.

Well I've got good news for all you dumb cattle out there...

Danny Cohen that spent £22 million of License Payers money on that shitty karaoke ego-fest " The Voice " , is no longer the boss of BBC1.

He's now the boss of all BBC programming.

Danny Cohen named as new BBC director of television.


Expect 6 million inverted reality Hitler documentaries and other such TV delights encouraging healthy gender confusion and the breakdown of the family unit.

Panorama episodes revealing how awful and racist all white people are and science-bending programs explaining how we're all from Africa really and that national suicide via multi-culturalism and jailing of dissenting voices like Emma West is the only solution to the 'white problem' and other assorted nation wrecking subconscious programming.

Propaganda designed to undermine society, brought to you direct in your homes through the magic of the TV set.

Television the drug of the nationDiseasing the cattle's minds and promoting miscegenation.

MSM Delenda Est!

"Danny Cohen named as new BBC director of television."

Is he even British?

There is an alternative. Just don't watch television. The couch potatoes can stay duly lobotomised in front of the tv, while those of us who eschew this sewage can fill our time with more interesting and rewarding pursuits.

"There is an alternative. Just don't watch television."

But all your neighbours will still be hooked on it, as will your kids' classmates. And all "their" opinions and attitudes will be shaped by those who own the "British" and "American" media.

"There is an alternative. Just don't watch television."

True. But you'll still have to pay for it.

I notice that the original post by 'enchanted icon' has gone .

Thought it was keeping in with the tone of the article myself, in that our new mighty czar for 'British 'propaganda was unveiled.

"Danny Cohen that spent £22 million of License Payers money on that shitty karaoke ego-fest " The Voice ", is no longer the boss of BBC1.

He's now the boss of all BBC programming.

- - - - -

Great story!

Indeed it is, the matrix is starting to unravel, may it be ripped wide open.

Sadly the majority will passively observe as usual with their eyes wide shut.

- - - - -

To me it was a great atrocity to make 18 year old boys walk to their deaths facing machine guns and slaughter at the rate of 60000 a day during battles.
It was also a great outrage that British General Sir Douglas Haig signed the death warrants for 223 Commonwealth 18-20 year old soldiers because they suffered PTSD or deserted or mutinied against the senseless slaughter.Haig doesn`t deserve his statue in Trafalgar Square and AA Milne realized he was part of the problem not the solution. The first WWI was one of the greatest crimes against humanity and against 18-20 year old young men and the Plutocrats in Britain and Europe should all be ashamed of themselves,yet the Plutocrats and Royals dedicated statues in their dubious sychophantic "honour".

Re: " the Plutocrats in Britain and Europe should all be ashamed of themselves"

But as a Communist, don't you appreciate all the sacrifices (of Britons) that the plutocrats offered up in order to establish the USSR?

Your eyes just like your facts are wide shut Commarade.
Britain spent millions in arms and war material and manpower to overthrow the red Russians by supporting the White Russians in their attempt to overthrow the Bolsheviks from 1919-1926.Of course they would Monarchies ,even those with a constitution aren`t keen on sharing the crumbs left on the table and were terrified the revolution would spread and turn their privileged class distinctive unfair world upside down.In WWII politics and war make strange bedfellows ,and by the way

Russias heroic sacrifice and struggle against Nazi dark ages and their great victory at Kursk ensured that Germany and the Axis didn`t win WWII, and Hitlers invasion of Russia in 1941 saved Britain .It is well known that in 1945 Churchill urged Truman to drive on with the 7.5 million allies under arms [with atomic weapons] in Germany to Moscow.Truman told him to F.O.
Some support,some great Plutocrats and establishment.

Thank an unspecified multikulti deity/non-deity that we've all been saved from "the Nazi dark ages"!


Communist: "Britain spent millions in arms and war material and manpower to overthrow the red Russians by supporting the White Russians in their attempt to overthrow the Bolsheviks from 1919-1926."

= Westminster borrowed millions of pounds from certain usurious bankers, that would be paid back by taxpayers, to buy products from munitions manufacturers, to supply to Russians whose strength and movements were then relayed to the Kremlin, under the control of a certain people, in order to ensure that Russia would be crushed, while the bankers and arms dealers and the looters in the Kremlin got rich.

By "the Plutocrats", do you mean Jews?

No the ultra rich ruling elite that did include the Rothschilds and others. It is well known that Churchill was on the payroll of a large British/European Jewish Group in the 1930`s that staved off his personal bankruptcy and prevented his losing of his mansion home.It was at this same time he became an ardent anti-Nazi and advocated the vast rearming of British Forces that benefited the political anti-Nazi agenda of this jewish group and business agenda because they controlled much and many arms manufactories.
The greatest lie was Hitler wouldn`t guarantee the ultra rich Plutocrats their vast property rights and that they couldn`t trust Hitlers word-turns out Hitler did in fact guarantee French property rights-and this was one of the main reasons Churchill was able to persuade the war time Cabinet to fight on after the fall of France.

Churchill? I've heard that name before. A great man once wrote something about him. Ah, yes, now I remember -- William Joyce called Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden and Duff Cooper a "slobbering, bastardised mendacious triumvirate."

I just remembered something else a great Irishman wrote about this Churchill character.

"Both laughter and disgust were occasioned by the funny antics of this shoving, pushing, self-advertising, gaudy, garish, clever little Jew-boy [Hore-Belisha].

"His departure from the Cabinet meant no loss to Jewry: for Winston Spencer Churchill was there to hold the fort. This great-grandson of a plantation mulatto, illustrious descendant on his father's side of the famous Duke of Marlborough, became the kept protege of Mr. Barney Baruch some years ago. His amazing tergiversations during the first decade of the century excited public contempt. He coined that most unfortunate phrase 'terminological inexactitude' to palliate one of his own most blatant attempts at cheating the public. When Home Secretary in 1911, he showed his friendship for the workers by ordering the military to open fire on the miners of South Wales. Two were killed and many injured."During the last war, as First Lord of the Admiralty, he issued the report that the Battle of Jutland was lost. The markets crashed. In an ecstasy of patriotism, he and his comrades bought shares. Then he issued a second report. This time the Battle of Jutland was won. The necessity to peg the market had now expired. Therefore he and his comrades sold what they had bought."

Your argument would be stronger if you could get your facts right.

1. 18 year old boys did not walk to their deaths at a rate of 60,000 a day during battles. You are likely thinking of the casualty rate on the worst day of WWI (for the UK anyway) being the first day of the Battle of the Somme. The generally accepted number of casualties was 60,000 (actually a bit less) of which 20,000 were killed. Boys of 18 would be a minority of that amount.
2. A total of 346 British and Empire soldiers were executed for assorted offences, most of which would not carry the death penalty today. However, some of those executed had committed crimes such as murder which was capital offense at the time under criminal law.
3. Unless it's new, Haig doesn't have a statue in Trafalgar Square.
4. Why this obsession about 18-20 year olds? - anyone who died in WWI deserves our pity.
5. Haig has had terrible press for close to 100 years. Yet he rose from becoming a corps commander in 1914 to the builder of a force of 4.5 million men by 1918 which won the war after the Russians had given up and the French and Italians were are the end of their tether.
6. Haig was ultimately subservient to his political masters. The failure to countenance a negotiated peace was a political not a military issue.
7. The plutocrats and the royals. Not sure what is meant by plutocrat, but if you mean people of wealth and influence, well they didn't do very well during WWI. Wealth was massively eroded and their children were killed in large numbers and the nations where they exercised influence emerged from WWI impoverished or in the throws of revolution. As for the royals, apart from the UK and Belgium, they lost their positions, and in the case of Russia, their lives. Not a good outcome for either group.

Still your passion deserves respect. WWI was a catastrophe for Europe and was the starting point for the slow erosion of western values. It it is indeed closing in the gardens of the west, it began in Sarajevo in 1914.

Re: "Not sure what is meant by plutocrat, but if you mean people of wealth and influence, well they didn't do very well during WWI. Wealth was massively eroded and their children were killed in large numbers and the nations where they exercised influence emerged from WWI impoverished or in the throes of revolution."

But surely somebody profited from the war? Or a certain people.

Why this obsession about 18-20 year olds?

"Why this obsession about 18-20 year olds?"

It sounds good as emotional propaganda.

Apparently all the 30, 40, and 50-year-olds killed in the war were expendable.

What genius - to you it was all so jolly nasty.

So was slavery, the burning of witches, and the last Labour govt.

Yea and plutocratic Britain raised statues to the Witch Burners [Bloody Mary and Elizabeth I] but never the democratic socialists.Murdering millions of 18 year old boys for oil,power and control is very wrong.
By the way we are all economic slaves even today and the British system of sending penal convicts to Botony Bay for lives of hard work for stealing a loaf of bread,was as bad as slavery,so was selling Bernardo Boy Orphans to Canadian Farmers as virtual slaves to circumvent the slavery laws. To me anything that the USSR is criticized about regarding the Gulags and concentration camps was all done by Britain directly before including men women and children Boers in 1901 South African Concentration camps-the worlds first mass concentration camps. Hope your all very smug and proud.

- - - - -

"Hun Corpse Factories " ....hmmm , now where have I heard that before ?

"The Holocaust"?

- - - - -

War alas, is war - you either 'win' or 'lose'. Especially if there's any chance of losing, all nations will stoop to any horror, any lies to 'win'. Note win and lose in inverted commas! We Europeans committed suicide in WWI - creating the Bolshevik Revolution, Fascism and so on to WWII and what has happened since.

A Greek friend who lived through World War I remarked that the Germans never forgot the lies we British put out out them. Which is one reason why in World War II they actually did what we had told the world they had done in WWI!

Re: "War alas, is war - you either 'win' or 'lose'."


So, did Britain win or lose?

If Britain won, what did Britons win?

You lament the use of lies then top it all off with the biggest lie of them all...

"the biggest lie of them all"

Yes. So true.

- - - - -

The first casualty of war is truth. Thereafter it's life upon life upon life...

War is somebody's harvest.

- - - - -

Article: "The secret propaganda unit was established in 1916 to sustain support for the war when the enormous numbers of soldiers killed were rising."

And why were British soldiers in Europe?

Hopefully someone will find similar long-lost files documenting the British part in all the lies spread by National Socialist Germany, and the British drive to declare war against Germany (Sept. 3, 1939) by any means necessary, and who actually controlled (and controls) the UK.

It's important to keep in mind that if hundreds of thousands of British men hadn't given their lives and body-parts in the great fights for Freedom, then Britain today would not be blessed with all the Diversity and intellectual benefits brought by Somalis, Pakistanis, Jamaicans and all the other great peoples of the world; and British TV would not be enlivened by all the homosexual talk show hosts who have given so much to the nation.

Instead of being negative, we should just be grateful that the government no longer engages in such tactics.

Not all war propagandists were bad. For example, Jim Rose worked as an Intelligence operative, at Bletchley Park and other places, and the tactics he learned there helped him when he went on to become the first director of the International Press Institute in Geneva, then director of Survey of Race Relations, a five-year study into post-war immigration in Britain. The study was published in 1969 as Colour and Citizenship. In 1968, he co-founded the Runnymede Trust 'think-tank", which invented "Islamophobia" to correctly pathologize Britons who opposed mass immigration of Muslims into Britain. This was especially admirable considering Rose was a Jew. It's good that he was able to sell good things to the British public, and teach them how to think.

Some happy war propaganda from Bletchley Park:


Again, to emphasize the point that sometimes war propaganda is good, consider the case of "Dad's Army".

Even after the Second World War, or Brothers War, or Great Patriotic War, as it is variously known, it was important to make sure Britons did not forget the point of the war -- that Britons of all ages and incomes and every other classification must be ready to make sacrifices for "the oppressed".

Therefore it was important that Chaim Reuben Weintrop ("Bud Flanagan") give us "Who Do You Think You Are Kidding, Mr Hitler?" (the "Dad's Army" theme song). In doing so, he reminded Britons that they were on the Good side, and cannot be fooled, and that Hitler was a liar.

For propaganda value, in order to strengthen the truth, it was a good thing that Chaim Reuben Weintrop had a false Irish name, making the target audience feel more comfortable with Weintrop. If he had used his real name, then anti-Semites and bigots and other small-minded British bigots would have been more likely to dismiss his propaganda.

I trust this has illuminated readers on the importance of war propaganda, before, during and even after the desired war; and why it is honest to lie.

Excerpt from "Children of the Dead End: The Autobiography of a Navvy", by Patrick MacGill, January, 1914:

[Harwell:] "You'll fall in love with London directly, old man, for it is the centre of the universe. The world radiates outwards from Charing Cross and revolves around the Nelson column. London is the world, journalism is the midden of creation."

"Do you really think that men are acting in a straight-forward manner by writing unfair and untruthful articles for the public?" I asked.

"The public is a crowd of asses and you must interest it. You are paid to interest it with plausible lies or unsavoury truths. An unsavoury truth is always palatable to those whom it does not harm. Our readers gloat over scandal, revel in scandal, and pay us for writing it. Learn what the public requires and give it that. Think one thing in the morning and another at night; preach what is suitable to the mob and study the principle of the paper for which you write. That's how you have to do it, Flynn. A paper's principle is a very subtle thing, and it must be studied. Every measure passed in Parliament affects it, it oscillates to the breezes of public opinion and it is very intangible. The principle of a daily paper is elusive, old man, damned elusive. Come in and have a whisky and soda."

"Not elusive but changeable, I suppose," I said, alluding to his penultimate remark as we stood at the bar of the wine shop." The principles of the Dawn are rather consistent, are they not?"

"The principles oscillate, old man. Your health, and may you live until newspapers are trustworthy ! Consistent, eh ? Some day you'll learn of the inconsistencies of Fleet Street, Flynn. Here the Jew is an advocate of Christianity, the American of Protection, the poet a compiler of statistics, the penny-a-liner a defender of the idle rich, and the reporter with anarchistic ideas a defender of social law and order. Here charlatans, false as they are clever, play games in which the pawns are religion and atheism, and make, as suits their purpose, material advantages of the former or a religion of the latter. Fleet Street is the home of chicanery, of fraud, of versatile vices and un-numbered sins. It is an outcome of the civilisation which it rules, a framer of the laws which it afterwards destroys or protects at caprice ; without conscience or soul it dominates the world. Only in its falseness is it consistent. Truth is further removed from its jostling rookeries than the first painted savage who stoned the wild boar in the sterile wastes of Ludgate Circus."

Twilight Over England:

"In England . . . the rising taxes, the rising prices, the wild confusion caused by evacuation, the commandeering of hotels, the collapse of the educational system, the daily blunders of the Ministry of Information, have led to the resignations of Lord Macmillan and Hore-Belisha from the Cabinet. The former was just a poor Scottish lawyer, who found it against his nature to make lies out of truth and truth out of nothing. He was inefficient, and he went. Hore-Belisha, however, has been moved back even as the Knight to guard the King. Had the war gone well, his melon-like physiognomy would have expanded in a horrible Moroccan Jewish grin: as, however, all seemed to be going badly, it was thought better by Jewry itself to withdraw him from the public gaze.

"Chamberlain was tired of being told that his War Minister was an Oriental pedlar of furniture: and anti-Jewish feeling has been increasing to such an extent in England that J Division of the London Metropolitan Constabulary had to be forbidden, in December 1939, to laugh at criticisms of the Jews expressed at public meetings. It would have been contrary to the Army's traditions to issue an order requiring officers and other ranks to abstain from laughing at their Minister for War. Yet there is no doubt that both laughter and disgust were occasioned by the funny antics of this shoving, pushing, self-advertising, gaudy, garish, clever little Jew-boy.

"His departure from the Cabinet meant no loss to Jewry: for Winston Spencer Churchill was there to hold the fort."

Onward Christian Soldiers,
You have nought to fear.
Israel Hore-Belisha
Will lead you from the rear.
Clothed by Monty Burton,
fed on Lyons pies;
Die for Jewish freedom
As a Briton always dies.

America's greatest poet:

"You have LOST the health of the mind. God knows how the scattered handful of Englishmen still in England can still speak one with another.

"I see NO remedy in your parliament. I don't mean as parliament. I mean in the personnel. It is your problem. You do not NOW even elect your own parliament. Whether WITH an election you could get anything save old dead meat, I do not know. During the last war a few men had a glimmer of instinct. On whatever formula, they called it pacifism. Was it? All of 'em I ever met were pugnacious. Was it an instinct to save the butt end of the RACE by not fighting? Is it a mistake to combat Germans by force?

"Is there a RACE left in England? Has it ANY will left to survive? You can carry slaughter to Ireland. Will that save you? I doubt it. Nothing can save you, save a purge. Nothing can save you, save an affirmation that you are English.

"Whore Belisha is NOT. Isaccs is not. No Sassoon is an Englishman, racially. No Rothschild is English, no Strakosch is English, no Roosevelt is English, no Baruch, Morgenthau, Cohen, Lehman, Warburg, Kuhn, Khan, Baruch, Schiff, Sieff, or Solomon was ever yet bom Anglo-Saxon.

"And it is for this filth that you fight. It is for this filth that you have murdered your empire, and it is this filth that elects your politicians.

"You have lost your tradition. You have not even learned what Lord Byron told you. You are, as even that foul rag the Times tells you, a little late in making a start.

"In the year 1942 Anno Domini, there is only one start you can make. And that is a start toward being England. A refusal to be a province of Israel, or an outpost of Yankee-Judaea.

"Quando tutti saremo forti."

- - - - -

You all seem to place the blame on frankly the Jews, I pose this, if a population of 20mn controls the world what would that make "Saxons" cretins by my standards. Total hogwash.

"You all seem to place the blame on frankly the Jews."

I simply reproduced the writings of two men. One was executed for his writings and radio broadcasts. The other was declared insane for his writings and radio broadcasts.

Are you saying that what they wrote makes sense?

Oh, I get it. You mean that a small group of people cannot have power over many, unless the many are cretins. How many Englishmen were there when Britain had an Empire from Egypt to South Africa, from Palestine to Hong Kong, from Afghanistan to Ceylon, from Vancouver to Newfoundland, from Yukon to Virginia, from Ghana to Kenya, from New Zealand to the British Virgin Islands? Are you saying that Negroes, Indians, and the rest are lower than cretins? You seem to be suggesting that they are savage morons. Perfect immigrant material now I suppose.

- - - - -

It's easy to grumble and complain about the petty deaths of a few British men. But it's important to remember what they achieved. First of all, everyone has to die sometime, so at least they died for a good cause. If all those British men had not sacrificed their lives, and arms, and legs, and faces, and balls, then Britain would not have been able to get Palestine. And if Britain had not gotten Palestine then the British people would have had to live with the shame of not being able to fulfill their obligations (the Balfour Declaration) to The Jew. And if the British had not grabbed Palestine then Jew terrorists would not have been able to seize it (in spite of 6,000,000 having been murdered by crazed Nazis), which would mean that the world would not be blessed now with a Jewish state in Palestine. Please try to look on the bright side.

These fought in any case

By Ezra Pound (a naughty, naughty man)

These fought in any case,
and some believing, pro domo, in any case . .

Some quick to arm,
some for adventure,
some from fear of weakness,
some from fear of censure,
some for love of slaughter, in imagination,
learning later . . .
some in fear, learning love of slaughter ;

Died some, pro patria, non dulce non et decor" . .
walked eye-deep in hell
believing in old men's lies, then unbelieving
came home, home to a lie,
home to many deceits,
home to old lies and new infamy ;
usury age-old and age-thick
and liars in public places.

Daring as never before, wastage as never before.

Young blood and high blood,

Fair cheeks, and fine bodies ;
fortitude as never before
frankness as never before,
disillusions as never told in the old days,
hysterias, trench confessions,
laughter out of dead bellies.


"In 1914, in the first three months, the best of you went out and got slaughtered. And your foul papers, the filth of your newsprint has been subsidized to keep your minds off it. A dirty bit of meat by the name of Gollancz has used your book trade to conceal it. You have almost NO means of communication."

And the filthy whores at The Telegraph and other foul propaganda outlets still take their orders from the same whore-masters, and keep your minds off of what matters, and do their best to stop you from naming The Enemy, "who both killed the Lord Jesus, and the prophets, and have persecuted us, and please not God, and are adversaries to all men." (I Thessalonians 2:15)

Let us not forget that Benito Mussolini worked as a war propagandist for MI5, making sure the war didn't end too soon (meaning it couldn't be allowed to stop before Britain got Palestine for The Jew):


The Telegraph:

"Mussolini's payments were authorised by Sir Samuel Hoare, an MP and MI5's man in Rome, who ran a staff of 100 British intelligence officers in Italy at the time. Cambridge historian Peter Martland, who discovered details of the deal struck with the future dictator, told the Guardian: 'Britain's least reliable ally in the war at the time was Italy after revolutionary Russia's pull out from the conflict. Mussolini was paid £100 a week from the autumn of 1917 for at least a year to keep up the pro-war campaigning – equivalent to about £6,000 a week today.'"

In 1917, Curzon and Hankey recommended that Britain seize ground in the Middle East. Lloyd George also wanted more effort on other fronts. Lloyd George appointed Allenby, telling him that his objective was “Jerusalem before Christmas” and that he had only to ask for reinforcements to get them.

The Chief of the Imperial General Staff ("CIGS") Robertson believed that Western Front commitments (Third Ypres was in progress from 31 July until November) did not justify a serious attempt to capture Jerusalem, and throughout 1917 put pressure on Allenby to demand unrealistically large reinforcements in order to discourage the politician-whores from authorising Middle East offensives. This tactic had no effect on the "British" drive to get Palestine for The Jew.

Well this article is about propaganda and a troll on this thread by the name of "nicholasi" arguably Golden Dawn is a prime example of propaganda in force.

Your personal Dreyfus Affair against the Jewish people and frankly lies about Britain assisting towards the creation of the state of Israel is a complete re-write of history.

At least nicholasi is telling the truth, putting up text and citations that have otherwise been hidden and suppressed from our schools, newspapers, radio and TV networks.

For once you're getting to hear the truth, though I can understand why you hate it and hence the energy spent over 2,000 years attacking it...

Oy vey! Tick tock tick tock tick tock, Jew-boy. Humans are sick and tired of your endless scheming and and kvetching and Jew-lies. Better get your grasping paws outta yer nogpockets and look for somewhere to hide.

Re: "Lies about Britain assisting towards the creation of the state of Israel is a complete re-write of history."

There's Jew-gratitude for you, Britons.

Yep, according to The Jew, Britain did nothing to get Palestine for The Jew.

And as if Britain in the middle of The Great War (and then again, after declaring war against Germany in 1939) owed The Jew anything at all!

What's the German for "Stab In The Back".

What's the Yiddish for "Gimme gimme gimme!"

Yes the USA did very well out of WWI, supplied arms and materials at great profit to both the fascists and democratic Britain from 1914-1917.The near bankrupt Britain was also as a direct result forced to sign the Washington Agreement that put the USA in the ascendency of world power.Canada did very well in war profits in both WWI and WWII.Some would argue that the hopeless deplorable incompetence and tyranny of Csar Nicholas II and slaughter and invasion of Russia by Germany helped bring about the Russian Revolution of 1917 that saw Russia emerge as a great dominant world power with an educated productive well fed population 50 years later.Spain was wise enough to stay out of the slaughter.
In the very very early 19th Century when Britain was under siege by France and in danger of being invaded by an all conquering Napoleon the British Stock Market dropped to an all time low and all the English were panicing and trying to sell their stocks at give away prices.The economy nearly collapsed but for Nathaniel Rothschild who stood in the middle of the British Stock exchange and started to buy buy buy and some believe prevented a rout and crash. He also cleaned up for the House of Rothschild.

Well, you're an idiot, but at least you're Naming The Jew. ;-)

In case you hadn't noticed Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration, Britain abstained from the UN vote.

In exchange for The Jew getting the US to save Britain's ass in the war, the whores in Westminster promised The Jew that they would establish a "Jewish homeland" (not a Jew state) in Ottoman Palestine. Britain did so. The Jew, as one should expect, stabbed its benefactor in the back, and engaged in a terrorist campaign against British forces while Britain was busy fighting Germany yet again on behalf of The Jew.

Voila le juif:

"Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration"

Oy vey!

1. That's a lie, as one can only expect from The Jew.

2. Why would the greatest empire in the world just up and declare that it was going to go and fight to get land just so it could hand it over to a pack of Jews? It was supposed to be just some sort of magnanimous Christmas present to Christ-killers?

3. "Oy vey! You didn't give us enough of what we wanted, so we slashed British soldiers throats and murdered other British solders at the King David Hotel! Take that! That'll teach you!"

How many Jews were killed by Christians for that exact sentiment spanning over 800 years in Europe?

Oy vey! I don't know. Was it enough?

Just pick some fantastic number out of thin air, like usual.

Make it as high as you thing the atrocity porn market can bear.

- - - - -

At least all the bloodshed was not in vain .

If it wasnt for our Glorious Victory , these British Men might all be speaking German now !

• Obi Nwokeh, 19
• Christopher Omoregie, 18
• Samsom Odegbune, 18
• Adonis Akra, 18,
• Samuel Roberts, 19,
• Femi Oderinwale, 18,
• Victoria Osoteku, 19,
• Junior Bayode, 19,

Eight young people have been convicted of killing 15-year-old Sofyen Belamouadden in front of horrified commuters at one of the UK's busiest stations.The series of linked trials involving 20 defendants has been the biggest-ever joint prosecution of a gang over a killing.The Appeal Court's decision that Junior Bayode, who was found guilty of manslaughter, will not face a retrial for murder marks the end of a prosecution that revealed how tensions between youths could spiral out of control in the heart of the capital.As commuters headed towards Victoria Station during the evening rush hour of 25 March 2010, they were confronted with a horrifying scene.A teenager stood in the middle of the road, wielding a samurai sword, and then led an armed gang in a charge towards their rivals.In the melee that followed, Sofyen was chased into the London Underground station by as many as 15 of the youths who stabbed, kicked and punched him to death.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15310015... problem of course is ....err..computer games ?http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

Are those Welsh names?

No , not Welsh , " British " . You know , like 'Aggro Santos ':

Rapper and former I'm A Celebrity contestant Aggro Santos raped two women after gigs in different parts of the country, a court has been told.Mr Santos is accused of forcing a woman in her 20s to have sex with him after a show in Yeovil in September 2010.In 2011 he raped a girl of 16 while his friend forced her to perform a sex act, Chichester Crown Court was told.


Yes, they do add a lovely spice to British life. And they are not to blame because their horseplay and shenanigans got a little bit out of hand. Even though they are regular English chaps, some people who cling on to insane and out-dated notions of what is supposedly "English" refuse to accept them. So they have no choice but to go on killing sprees.

Somebody's given the censor a kick in the ass.

"Get the hell up! It's red alert in the comments section. If this keeps up the goyim will start waking up!"

"Guard duty was given exclusively to the Death's-Head units (Totenkopfverbaende) whose members were recruited from the toughest Nazi elements, served an enlistment of twelve years and wore the familiar skull-and-bones insignia on their black tunics. The commander of the first Death's-Head detachment and the first commander of the Dachau camp, Theodor Eicke, was put in charge of all the concentration camps. The fly-by-night ones were closed down and larger ones constructed, the chief of which (until the war came, when they were expanded into occupied territory i.e Poland, were Dachau near Munich, Buchenwald near Weimar, Sachsenhausen, which replaced the Oranienburg camp of inital fame near Berlin, Ravensbrueck in Mecklenburg (for women) and, after the occupation of Austria in 1938, Mauthausen near Linz - names which, with Auschwitz, Belsec and Treblinka, which were later established in Poland, were to become all too familar to most of the world" Apart from idiots!

"In them, beofre the end mercifully came, millions of hapless persons were done to death and millions of others subjected to debasement and torture more revolting than all but a few minds could imagine."

The extermination camps, the slave labor camps, the camps where the inmates were used as guinea pigs for Nazi "medical research," occurred during the war, not in the build up, but the early forms of camps before the war were not humane. I have before me a copy of the regulations drawn up for Dachau on November 1, 1933, by its first commander, THeodor Eicke, who when he became head of all the camps applied them throughout.

Article 11. THe following offenders, considered as agitators, will be hanged:
Anyone who....politicizes, holds inciting speeches and meetings, forms cliques, loiters around with others; who for the purpose of supplying the propaganda of the opposition with atrocity stories, collects true or false information about the concentration camp, receives such information, buries it, talks about it to others, smuggles it out of the camp into the hands of foreign visitors, etc.

William Shirer


M.I. 7b

MI 7b – the discovery of a lost propaganda archive of the Great War

Y Rhyfel Byd Cyntaf a'r profiad Cymreig
The Welsh Experience of World War One

This is part of a series of blog posts by people who have stories to tell about items which form part of the Welsh Experience of World War 1 project.

Capt A Lascelles-s Letter Dawson-s Lt James Price Lloyd - Welsh Regiment-s

Up until a few months ago, I’d never heard of MI 7b, and hadn’t much of a clue about my great uncles and their war service in the Great War. Today, April 12th is my 61st birthday, and I have been presented with an amazing story. It goes like this.

Once upon a time, a long time ago, three boys left Aberedw and went by train from Aberedw Halt on their separate journeys to the Western Front in France, and the killing fields of the Somme, Ypres, and one small corner of a foreign field whose name is unknown. Uncle Jim was shot and wounded at Mametz in the first Battle of the Somme, Uncle John was shot and wounded at the second Battle of Ypres, and Uncle Geoff was gassed early in 1918, I don’t know where or when, but he too survived. At the end of the war, Jim and John founded Craig y Nos prep school in Swansea, and Geoff went out to South Africa, where it was thought the climate would help his breathing. John died in 1954, Jim in 1955 and Geoff in 1961. They had spent all their post-war lives teaching and reached out to the young minds of very many people during that time.

What makes this story special is that when Jim was wounded, he started to write and as a result of his efforts he was recruited into a propaganda outfit run by military intelligence called MI 7. Between 1917 and 1918, he wrote extensively about tales of heroism and life in the front line trenches. His work was turned into propaganda articles that were meant for publication in allied newspapers and journals. Although his work was meant to be published, it was a highly secret operation. So secret, in fact, that immediately the war ended in November 1918, the unit MI 7 was disbanded and all its official documents were destroyed so no one would ever know it existed.

Uncle Jim was Lieutenant (later Captain) James Price Lloyd, the eldest son of the Rector of Aberedw and he took his work home with him. That is why over 150 different articles of MI 7b remain – the sole surviving archive and witness to a propaganda offensive that was directed, not at the enemy, but at the Home Front and the people of the Empire, her Colonies and Dominions.

By chance, these papers were discovered when I was clearing my aunt’s home. There at the bottom of an old leather trunk, full of stuff that was due to be sent as rubbish, was a small green pamphlet. On the front cover was the title MI 7b, for private circulation only and it was dated January 1919. It was the valedictory house journal of a secret organisation and it listed the names of all who worked there.

I looked for Uncle Jim, but I found A A Milne as well! I also found, Cecil Street the author of the Dr Priestly novels, the Frontiersman and author Roger Pocock, the Irish Poet Patrick McGill and JP Morton of Bystander fame. A little research showed me that it was a bit like the Magnificent Seven had ridden into town, except that these were more than twenty or so of the greatest literary men of their day all working for MI 7b, along with Uncle Jim!

It was then I remembered that there were family papers including Uncle Jim’s work, which had been kept in a box in a garage for many years and had lain unnoticed, unappreciated and forgotten for many years. It took me many months to sort out Uncle Jim’s papers and put them in order along with the dozens of photographs of the family taken between 1900 and 1920. The detailed picture that emerged was one that enthralled and excited me, but also scared me. I knew it was an important discovery, but I didn’t know what it was that I had. I had started out to write an account of Uncle Jim’s service record and my research notes grew into a book! It was only when I heard that the National Library was involved in a project called Casgliad y Werin Cymru – or People’s Collection Wales – and that project would feed into a wider programme, partly financed by the European Commission and called 1914-18 Europeana that I knew what to do.

I started out copy-typing the articles as I collated them – but that was too hard and too slow. I completed the collating task to identify two categories that provide the simplest of catalogues; the archive comprises “Tales of the VC” and what academics call rich or thick description of life in the trenches of the Western Front. I photographed each of the documents and tried to keep to the order in which they were written. Every page of the archive and the note books, each scrap of paper, cutting and original photographs has been digitised. In doing so, I became familiar with all the archive but, as yet, have read only a few of the texts.

The Casgliad y Werin project will achieve my objective to get the archive into the public domain so that the contents are preserved and ensure they survive, and be accessible to everyone without charge. In truth, every one of the Tales of the VC has already been bought and paid for, costing more often than not the ultimate price. I hope the relatives, the descendents of those whose heroism is recorded get to see and recognise the honour that is forever associated with their family. The tales should engender pride and respect, no matter what feelings one may hold about war and politics, for individual courage and sacrifice deserve nothing less. Another objective is to try and understand the significance of the archive; the contents may be easily read, but what does their very existence imply?

My initial reading shows me that not all the articles in the archive were “passed for publication” by the censor, though most bear the official stamp of MI 7b, or the mark of someone more senior in the War Office’s food chain. What is accepted, post correction and scrutiny, gets passed to the typing pool, some marked “Urgent”, and then was passed to biddable proprietors of newspapers and foreign news agencies. These were printed and informed public opinion, and moulded the debate on the Clapham Omnibus. Arguably, it is in the articles that weren’t used that the poignant and bitter truth is revealed. Many of the articles were too close to reality to have made it through the propaganda process without substantial revision; some of the early drafts are decidedly “off message”, but each adds a part to a vivid illustration from a contemporary perspective of a War fought almost a century ago.

“Britain’s Winged Warriors” describes the operation of the pigeon messenger service, others describe the “Evolution of the Tank”, or “How the Truth Comes to Germany By Air”; they are obvious propaganda pieces, but nonetheless interesting for that, but these general articles aren’t nearly as exciting as “A Trench Raid”, or “The Peril that Walks by Night”.  These are the right-down dirty, bloody, guts n’ glory, tell-it-like-it-is literary pictures that could illustrate a “Penny Dreadful” comic, or send frissons down the petticoats of any Edwardian parlour maid, or stirred the blood and stiffened the resolve of the young man whose call up was imminent. One thing these Military Intelligence documents all have in common is that they were intended for publication in the press throughout the Empire, her Colonies, and Dominions.  In total there are more than a hundred and fifty pencil drafts, manuscripts and typescripts, along with notebooks and maps, and each one still tells a tale. The truly exciting thing is, that all the documents were meant to have been silenced forever, because they were thought to be “too incriminating”. MI 7b was quickly disbanded in November of 1918, within days of the Armistice, and all its papers were destroyed, apparently.

Why did the Government and the Crown want MI 7 to disappear and for all the official papers to be destroyed?

The answer to the question “Why?” has yet to be answered fully, but it is very exciting to try and find out. The sheer scale of the propaganda offensive and the nature of the resources deployed to it suggests that “MI 7b – the discovery of a lost propaganda archive from the Great War” is a much bigger story than first meets the eye.

Jeremy Arter
April 2013

Copies of paper from the archive will soon be available to view as part of the Welsh Experience of World War 1 Project via the People’s Collection Wales website.


Y Rhyfel Byd Cyntaf a'r profiad Cymreig The Welsh Experience of World War One

Excerpts from "Children of the Dead End: The Autobiography of a Navvy", by Patrick MacGill, January, 1914:

On St. Stephen's Day the Glenmornan boys beat the bushes and killed as many wrens as they could lay their hands on. The wren is a bad bird, for it betrayed St. Stephen to the Jews when they wanted to put him to death. The saint hid in a clump of bushes, but the wrens made such a chatter and clatter that the Jews, when passing, stopped to see what annoyed the birds, and found the saint hiding in the undergrowth. No wonder then that the Glenmornan people have a grudge against the wren.

Kissing is almost unknown in the place where I was born and bred. Judas betrayed the Son of God with a kiss, which proves beyond a doubt that kissing is of the devil's making. It is no harm to kiss the dead in Glenmornan, for no one can do any harm to the dead.


[Harwell:] "You'll fall in love with London directly, old man, for it is the centre of the universe. The world radiates outwards from Charing Cross and revolves around the Nelson column. London is the world, journalism is the midden of creation."

"Do you really think that men are acting in a straight-forward manner by writing unfair and untruthful articles for the public?" I asked.

"The public is a crowd of asses and you must interest it. You are paid to interest it with plausible lies or unsavoury truths. An unsavoury truth is always palatable to those whom it does not harm. Our readers gloat over scandal, revel in scandal, and pay us for writing it. Learn what the public requires and give it that. Think one thing in the morning and another at night; preach what is suitable to the mob and study the principle of the paper for which you write. That's how you have to do it, Flynn. A paper's principle is a very subtle thing, and it must be studied. Every measure passed in Parliament affects it, it oscillates to the breezes of public opinion and it is very intangible. The principle of a daily paper is elusive, old man, damned elusive. Come in and have a whisky and soda."

"Not elusive but changeable, I suppose," I said, alluding to his penultimate remark as we stood at the bar of the wine shop." The principles of the Dawn are rather consistent, are they not?"

"The principles oscillate, old man. Your health, and may you live until newspapers are trustworthy ! Consistent, eh? Some day you'll learn of the inconsistencies of Fleet Street, Flynn. Here the Jew is an advocate of Christianity, the American of Protection, the poet a compiler of statistics, the penny-a-liner a defender of the idle rich, and the reporter with anarchistic ideas a defender of social law and order. Here charlatans, false as they are clever, play games in which the pawns are religion and atheism, and make, as suits their purpose, material advantages of the former or a religion of the latter. Fleet Street is the home of chicanery, of fraud, of versatile vices and un-numbered sins. It is an outcome of the civilisation which it rules, a framer of the laws which it afterwards destroys or protects at caprice; without conscience or soul it dominates the world. Only in its falseness is it consistent. Truth is further removed from its jostling rookeries than the first painted savage who stoned the wild boar in the sterile wastes of Ludgate Circus."


Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

From "The Gentleperson's Guide To Forum Spies"

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.



Fr Michael Azkoul:

28 Oct 12
St Louis, Mo

Metropolitan Ephraim, Bishop of Boston
Holy Transfiguration of Monastery
278 Warren Street
Brookline, Mass.

Your Eminence,

I was unaware until this summer about the nearly two year controversy which had disrupted the harmony of the HTM community. I learned only then that the cause of the upheaval was the Name-Worship heresy — euphemistically called “Name-Glorifying.” I was stunned by what you had written — “That God’s Name is not His Essence, but rather it is the revealed truth about Himself, that is, His Uncreated Energy, His Uncreated Grace, His Providence, His Glory…” Are you redefining the glossary of Orthodox theology?

Perhaps, I was wrong I thought, for it seemed to me that you must have known that the Uncreated Energy is a distinction within the divine Nature, an Operation (to use the language of the Latin Fathers) — It is God, to be sure — but it is impersonal.

It was inconceivable to me that anyone would worship a name, even the holy Name of God. In the words of St. Gregory of Nyssa,

“Names were invented to denote the the Existent One, not for His sake, but for ours” (Answer to Eunomius, Bk. 2) And again, “We, following the suggestions of Scriptures, have learned that the Nature [of God] is un-nameable and unspeakable, and we say that every term, either invented by the custom of men, or handed down to us by the Scriptures, provides us with conceptions of the Divine Nature without including the significance of that Nature itself.” (Answer To Ablabius).

Thus, we honor it, we glorify it, we revere it, venerate it, because God’s Name identifies Him Whom I worship; likewise, the Name of Jesus the Christ.

I cannot understand under what circumstances an Orthodox Christian would be induced an worship a Name. We worship the Persons of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit not their Names. (We also understand Its Biblical and Patristic context, as well as the idioms and metaphors they use to describe the purport of the Name).

At first I did not pay attention to quarrel over “Name-Worship,” until it finally came to my attention that the Name of God was being worshiped as something ontologically equated with the Uncreated Energy of God. Although the Energies of God may be called God (“divinity”) as emanating from Him, they are Operations of God. We do not worship the Energies or Operations whatever form they take. The Energies or Operations are divine Forces or Powers. They are impersonal. Moreover, you must see that if the Name of God is the Energy of God — and the Energy or Operation is God — then even letters G-O-D are deified and must be worshiped, for those letters compose the word God. .Why don’t you accept the logic of your position?

It is the same with the other things you worship:

"Dear Fr. Michael,

"Do I worship God’s providence? Yes, because His providence – i.e. His Grace – is God. Do I worship God’s healing Grace? Yes, because His healing Grace – is God. Do I worship His creative Power? Yes, because His creative Power – is God? Do I worship the Holy Trinity? Yes, because the Holy Trinity is God; God’s Essence and Energies are God, and I worship them. Do I worship the Light of the Transfiguration? Yes, because the Light of the Transfiguration is God. St. John Chrysostom says 'God’s Name is worthy of praise by nature.' That’s what I believe also.

"In Christ,

"+ Ephraim, metropolitan."

The Nature of God has three aspects: the Essence, the Energy or Operation and the Persons. The Essence is incommunicable, the Energy communicable (e. g., Grace, Light, etc.), while the divine Persons are both; hence, by the latter, the Person of the Son communicates in the flesh with His creatures. In any case, we do not worship the Essence or the Energy, not even the mystery of divine Incarnating Itself, only the Incarnate Lord; and neither do we worship Names of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Names of the Persons indicate the distinct properties of Each: the Father who is the Cause of the Trinity, the Son Who is Begotten of Him, the Holy Spirit Who Proceeds from the Father alone. The Uncreated Energies or Operations emanates from Each of Them, as St Gregory Palamas wrote.

In the Old Testament, God’s Names — Yahweh (He Who creates), Elohim (authority), El Shaddai (Almighty), Adonai (Master), etc. — describe His actions, that is, His Energies, but never are the Names worshiped no matter their grandeur, authority, repute or wonder. The People of ancient Israel adored only their Lord Who in fact was God the Son. To be sure, they knew that “to call upon the Name of the Lord” is to worship God (Gen. 21:33; 26:25), but to call upon His Name is to glorify, implore and entreat Him, not to worship the Name by which they called upon Him. Thus, your quotation from St John Chrysostom is irrelevant.

I have corresponded more than once with your Eminence and Bishop Gregory on this matter. The best His Grace could say — “We do not worship words.” I was delighted until it was pointed out to me that his statement was tautology. Then, came Fr John Fleser’s compelling letter; the powerful e-mails of Fr Yakov Tseitlin and, to be sure, numerous letters from other confused and disconsolate brethren priests of our own Church. We saw some of them at the October clergy synaxis They would not serve at the Sunday Liturgy. I spoke also with several laymen, monks and clergy who had already left HOCNA, including Bishop Dimitri.

Also, my son immediately saw the flaws in the arguments of your Eminence, your desperate appeal to the Church Fathers. The citations were dubious at best. He mentioned, too, that you had not repudiated the impious “the Awake Sleeper,” the heresy which had so troubled HOCNA and caused so many to depart your omophor. The same has happened again and I fear will continue to happen as the result of your adoption of this new heterodoxy. Indeed, one heresy invites another.

I can no longer endure the painful sentiment which has urged me to remain loyal to irresolute bishops, because they have been so long my friends and companions for fifty years and for whom I have had and continue to have very strong affection. Although grateful to my HOCNA brethren (especially, Fr Neketas Palassis) for their many kindnesses, I must act according to conscience. Therefore, I inform your Eminences that, invoking Canon 15 of the First-and- Second Council of 861, I and the congregation of St Catherine of Sinai must withdraw from your authority in order to find refuge with the ecclesial sanity of Bishop Dimitri of Boston under the Synod of Archbishop Kallinikos.

May you find once more the peace in the Faith you once served so well and for so long.

With all respect due your title,

Archpriest Fr Michael Azkoul

[Source: http://nftu.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/28-Oct-12.pdf]

[HOCNA: The Holy Orthodox Church in North America; originally part of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR); incorporated in 1987 from the community of Holy Transfiguration Monastery in Brookline, Massachusetts (which had left ROCOR in 1986) and a group of former ROCOR clergy.]

Fr. Michael Azkoul was born in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He received his BA in Philosophy from Calvin College (1954), his BD in Theology from St. Vladimir's Russian Orthodox Seminary (1958) and his MA and PhD in Medieval History from Michigan State University (1963–1967). He has taught at Michigan State University, St. Louis University and Washington University and also at Seminex Lutheran Seminary. He has written numerous pamphlets, and articles in St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly, The Greek Orthodox Theological Review, Theological Studies, The Byzantine and Patristic Review.

Ordained to the Diaconate in 1956 and to the Priesthood in 1958, by Archbishop Anthony Bashir, he has served successively in the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of the USA, the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, the Holy Orthodox Church in North America, and (currently) the Synod of Bishops of the True Orthodox Church of Greece (Archbishop Kallinikos Sarantopoulos).

Fr. Michael is the author of:
  • Narcissus and the Magi Microform: A Study of the Relation between Faith and Reason in Greek Patristic life and in Western Thought (1957)
  • Anti-Christianity: The New Atheism (1981)
  • On the Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit by Photius of Constantinople (1983)
  • The Teachings of the Holy Orthodox Church (1986)
  • The Influence of Augustine of Hippo on the Orthodox Church (1990)
  • Why Christianity (1994)
  • St. Gregory of Nyssa and the Tradition of the Fathers (1995)
  • The Toll-House Myth: The Neo-Gnosticism of Fr. Seraphim Rose (1997)
  • Once Delivered to the Saints: An Orthodox Apology for the New Millennium (2000)
  • God, Immortality and Freedom of the Will according to the Church Fathers: A Philosophy of Spiritual Cognition (2006)
  • Order of Creation, Order of Redemption: The Ordination of Women in the Orthodox Church (2007)
  • God of Our Fathers, Gods of the West: The Patristic Tradition and the New Polytheism (2009)
  • Augustine of Hippo (2011; co-written with Bishop Gregory)

I note with interest that Fr Seraphim Rose, a cult leader, wrote the following letter to Fr Michael Azkoul in 1981:

June 13/26, 1981
St. Tryphillius of Cyprus

Dear Father Michael [Azkoul],

Christ is in our midst!

Thank you for your letter. I am frankly happy to see someone with your views on Blessed Augustine willing to do something besides hit him (and all of us who have any respect for him) over the head.

You ask for cooperation on what seems to be a "thorough study" of Blessed Augustine. I really wonder about the value of such a study—for someone who wishes to expose the source of "Western influence" in Orthodox theology, this detailed analysis itself seems so terribly Western!

If your attempt is to find out Augustine's real place in the Orthodox Church, I think your approach is all wrong. It assumes that "we moderns" are the ones who can do this—that we can "know better" than anyone in the Orthodox past. I don't think so. I have a deep distrust of all of us who are writing on theological subjects today—we are more under "Western influence" than anyone before, and the less we are aware of it the more obnoxious our "Westernism" becomes. Our whole cold, academic, and often disdainful approach to theology is so remote from the Fathers, so foreign to them. Let us admit this and try not to be so presumptuous (I speak for myself also).

I have no time (and probably not the sources) to find out how much St. Photios or St. Mark read of Blessed Augustine. I would suspect that St. Photios had read rather little apart from the texts under dispute, and St. Mark probably more (in fact, St. Mark can probably be shown to be under Augustine's "influence" in some way if you search hard enough! —his disciple Gennadius, after all, was the translator of Thomas Aquinas into Greek). Undoubtedly their respect for Augustine was based on the general respect for him in the Church, especially in the West from the very beginning.

And this brings up the only real question I think you might fruitfully research: what did the Western Church think of Blessed Augustine in the centuries when it was Orthodox? The West knew him as one of their own Fathers; it knew his writings well, including the disputes over them. What did the Western Fathers who were linked with the East think of him? We know St. Cassian's opinion—he challenged (politely) Augustine's teaching on grace while accepting his authority on other questions. St. Vincent of Lerins' argument is more with the immoderate followers of Augustine. In neither case was there talk of "heresy," or of someone who was totally un-Orthodox. St. Faustus of Lerins—if anyone, he should be an enemy of Augustine, but the evidence seems to the contrary. St. Caesarius of Arles, St. Gregory the Great-admirers of Augustine, while not following his exaggerations on grace. I don't mention some of the enthusiastic followers of Augustine.

There is room for research here in Latin sources, but no research can overthrow the obvious fact (it seems to me)—the Orthodox West accepted him as a Father. If he's really a "heretic," then doesn't the whole West go down the drain with him? I'm sure you can find enough signs of "Western mentality" in Gregory the Great, for example, to disqualify him as a Father and Saint in the eyes of many of today's Orthodox scholars—he also is accepted in the East on the basis of his general reputation in the West, and on the basis of his "Dialogues" (which I'm sure a few would now question as having a right to be called an Orthodox book).

I think the "heresy hunt" over Augustine reveals at least two major faults in today's Orthodox scholars who are pursuing it:

1. A profound insecurity over their own Orthodoxy, born of the uncertainties of our times, the betrayal of ecumenism, and their own purely Western education. Here Augustine is a "scapegoat"—hit him hard enough and it proves how Orthodox you yourself really are!

2. An incipient sectarian consciousness-in attacking Augustine so bitterly one not only attacks the whole Orthodox West of the early centuries, but also a great many Orthodox thinkers of recent centuries and today. I could name you bishops in our Church who think like Augustine on a number of points-are they, then, "heretics" too? I think some of our anti-Augustinians are coming close to this conclusion, and thus close to schism and the formation of an "Orthodox" sect that prides itself on the correctness of its intellectual views....

I myself am no great admirer of Augustine's doctrines. He does indeed have that Western "super-logicalness" which the Eastern Fathers don't have (the same "super-logicalness" which the critics of Augustine today display so abundantly!). The one main lovable and Orthodox thing about him is his Orthodox feeling, piety, love for Christ, which comes out so strongly in his non-dogmatic works like the Confessions (the Russian Fathers also love the Soliloquies). To destroy Augustine, as today's critics are trying to do, is to help to destroy also this piety and love for Christ—these are too "simple" for today's intellectuals (even though they also claim to be "pious" in their own way). Today it is Augustine; tomorrow (and it's already begun) the attack will be on the "simple" bishops and priests of our Church. The anti-Augustine movement is a step towards schism and further disorders in the Orthodox Church.

Let us assume that one's exegesis of Romans 5:12 is incorrect; that one believes like Augustine on the transmission of original sin; that one knows little of the difference between the "transcendent" and the "economic" Trinity and sometimes confuses them. Can't one still be Orthodox? Does one have to shout so loudly one's "correctness" on such matters, and one's disdain (and this disdain is strongly felt!) for those who believe thus? In the history of the Church, opinions such as these which disagree with the consensus of the Church have not been a cause for heresy hunts. Recognizing our fallible human nature, the Fathers of the past have kept the best Orthodox views and left in silence such private views which have not tried to proclaim themselves the only Orthodox views.

I myself fear the cold hearts of the "intellectually correct" much more than any errors you might find in Augustine. I sense in these cold hearts a preparation for the work of Antichrist (whose imitation of Christ must also extend to "correct theology"!); I feel in Augustine the love of Christ.

Forgive me for my frankness, but I think you probably welcome it. I have spoken from the heart, and I hope you will not pass this letter around so it can be put in various "files" and picked apart for its undoubted shortcomings.

May God preserve us all in His grace! Please pray for us.

With love in Christ,

Unworthy Hieromonk Seraphim

[Source: Father Seraphim Rose, The Place of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church, St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, Platina, CA [1983] 1996, pp. 93-101.]

What is Secularism?, by Father Michael Azkoul

At The Orthodox Christian Youth Conference Lectures, Ontario, Canada, 1978

Have you ever listened to a debate, perhaps on television, concerning abortion and not heard the name of Christ or God mentioned? Have you ever been dumbfounded by the number of teachers and scholars who publically defend sexual perversion and promiscuity? Have you ever wondered what brought about the Woman’s Liberation movement? What is the ultimate cause of the new wave of vulgarity in music and art? What explains the “slob syndrome” or the excessive informality which everywhere confronts us? Why has “democracy” become almost a political dogma? Have you ever reflected on the gradual disappearance of kingship over the last two hundred years? What is the explanation for relativism and pluralism? What has made ecumenism possible? Why have so many people spurned “organized religion?” In human terms, the word which describes the attitudes, values, and ideas behind this lamentable state of affairs is secularism.

We want, in the time allotted to us, to identify the most characteristic features of modern secularism. We ought to know, at the outset, that it is a Western phenomenon and this explains our preoccupation with the history of Western philosophy and theology. Special attention will be given to France and Germany of the nineteenth century, because it was there that the principles of modern secularism were formulated. Finally, there will be an Orthodox critique of what has become the Churches “changing environment,” the one with which She must contend henceforth.

As a background to our remarks about modern secularism, it will be useful to briefly discuss previously held ideas about the world. Such a discussion, too, will with the aide of historical perspective, bring clarity to the word world in its present understanding. One should be cautioned that the term secularism is a neologism, a new word invented and popularized in this century. We are taking liberties therefore, by applying secular, secularism or anti-secular to those other world-views. To be sure, there has always been a secular tradition in every culture, but its adherents used different language, the language of their time and place, to express their feelings and attitudes.

1. The adjective secular and the noun secularism derive from the Latin saeculum which is usually translated a period of time, an age. It is the complement of the Latin word mundus which refers to the world in space. When a Roman employed the word saeculum, he was alluding to a moment in time; and when he boasted of the Empire’s expansion across the Mediterranean or into Germany, Africa and Britain, he used some form of the word mundus. Rome, as he said, was caput mundi, “head of the world.” Both saeculum and mundum were attributes of time, tempora, which he conceived as reaching indefinitely into the past and future. The thinking of many Romans, however, will change with the impact of Asian and Greek influence.

Among the ancient Greeks the distinction between the world in time and the world in space was never made clear. There is no way to match aion with saeculum or kosmos with mundus. Aion is surely the word for age, but age for the Hellenes was more than a period of time; it was a description of the movement of time itself. Time, said the Greeks, moves in a circle and they saw this cyclicism in everything” the course of empires, the seasons, biological, animal, and human life. Nothing escaped the power of time, of fate: everything came into being, reached its acme, deteriorated and passed into the oblivion from whence it had come, as the Greek historian, Polybius, tells us. This view was surely very common, yet there was also a “mystical tradition,” as some scholars say, which came into greater prominence after Alexander’s conquest. Ideas about the soul and reincarnation, about time and the prison of the body, about the escape from the cycle of time, became very popular.

The Hebrews believed that time was not circular, but linear; time had a definite beginning and was subject to the God who created it with the universe. Time was divided into “ages” (yom) in imitation of the seven “days” if creation. The ideas of duration, extension in space, universe and world (olam) were synonymous. Interestingly, some Hebrews denied the existence of heaven and immortality and looked rather for a political Messiah and a Kingdom of the Jews on earth. The Prophets, at least, preached a heavenly Messiah and a heavenly Kingdom, in anticipation of the gospel.

The Church, while confessing that God made the world good, also teaches that it is in a fallen condition, subject ot the Devil, the “god of the age.” His domination, of course, is temporary. With the Second Coming of the Lord, he will be banished, the resurrection of all flesh will occur, there will be a new and deified universe in which God will be “all in all.” In other words, the Church conceives the world to have been created, governed and judged by God. According to the Fathers, He has divided time into a number of ages, the last or “eighth age” being without end. The history of the world leads to that great and glorious consummation. The Church is the vehicle of God’s Power, a Power which is “in the world but not of it.” The world is both Her enemy and the object of Her love. The task of Orthodoxy is to sanctify the world, to rescue it from the Devil.

Thus, when St. John the Theologian wrote in his first epistle (ii, 15), “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him,” he was not alluding to the creation, but its fallen state: to the world of sin, corruption, death, and the devil. For this reason, St. Paul wrote to the church at Corinth, “what fellowship hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial?” (II Cor. vi, 14f). Nonetheless, this opposition between the Church and the world does not mean that She does not yearn to embrace all men, to transform their lives and destinies; on the other hand that love (agape) does not imply that She will disobey Christ. Her hand is out to the man in the pit, but She will not jump into it with him. She cannot save the world by sharing in its folly. The way of the Church is to pull the man out of the pit, that is, to free him from the Devil. God wants regeneration, not re-adjustment.

Modernity demands involvment in “a changing environment,” “changing” because unbelief is always “cast about by every wind of doctrine.” Modernity does not share the Church’s vision of history. The contemporary understanding of the world has antecedents deep in the life of the West, the post-Orthodox West. The movement of its independent existence, of the forming of its own brand of Christianity and its own historical perspective, is not easy to determine. The clear sign that the West was no longer Orthodox, surely, is 1204, the sack of Constantinople. Thomas Aquinas and the thirteenth century constructed the papal worldview, mingling the pure tradition of the Apostles with Hellenism, especially Aristotle. Herein lies a certain irony, for Scholasticism begat the Rennissance, which begat the Protestant Reformation, which begat Pietism and the Enlightenment, which begat Romanticism, which begat the nineteenth century, which begat the twentieth.

Of course, we are guilty of some oversimplification, but, in one sense, the history of the West is the story of gradual secularization. For a more precise statement of the facts, listen to the words of Henry Aiken, Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University:

From one point of view, the whole history of ideas in the modern age may be regarded as the history of the progressive breakdown of the medieval Christian synthesis most powerfully articulated in the Summas of Thomas Aquinas and most movingly and persuasively expressed in Dante’s Divine Comedy. Since the Renaissance, the primary and increasingly crucial ‘existential problem’ of man has been the adjustment of new attitudes and ideas to the orthodox vaules and traditional conception of human destiny that are represented in the medieval synthesis. From the middle of the eighteenth century on, however, the very possibility of such an adjustment came increasingly into question, and on more and more fundamental cultural levels. IN the nineteenth century, many philosophers can no longer credit such a possibility. They determined, therefore, to reconstitute the ideals of Western culture on a radically secular and humanistic, that is to say, a radically non-Christian basis (The age of Ideology. New York, 1956, p. 25).

With the twentieth century, and especially with the Bolshevik Revolution, the West and, indeed, the world, has entered what Harvey Cox has called the “epoch of the secular City.” By this expression he means “a change in the way men grasp and understand their life together” or the determination of modern man to replace the City of God with the City of Man. Man has displaced God as ruler of the earth. “The world has become his city,” Cox observes, “and his city has reached out to include the world. The name for the process by which this has come about is secularization” (The Secular City. New York, 1965, p. 4).

What more specifically is secularization? It is the “liberation” of man “first from religious and then from metaphysical control over his reason and language…the dispelling of all closed world0views, the breaking of all supernatural myths and sacred symbols.” Secularization is “man turning his attention from worlds beyond, and toward the world of this time (saeculum)…” (l.c.). His “liberation” signifies also that man has entered a new period of history, a period when, to use the celebrated phrase of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, man has “come of age.” He is responsible for the world. He is a “big boy” who no longer needs God, the celestial “big daddy” to provide, guide and protect him. As Professor J.C. Raines remarked, “He comes to know himself now as an active citizen and caretaker of this homeland, earth, who must bear, without benefit of eternal interventions, the consequences of his own world-making, world-shattering activity.” He will eradicate his ancient enemies — death, disease, war, oppression and hatred. The great tools of his genius are science and technology. The “end of the Constantinian era has come” proclaims the German historian, Guenter Jacob, “and a new world has begun.”

2. Let us now examine the three most conspicuous features of modern secularism: a) “the death of God;” b) pluralism or “tolerance;” and c) relativism. We will see that pluralism and relativism are the necessary deductions from “the death of God” ideology.

A. The Death of God

The expression “the death of God” or, as some prefer it, “the absence of God” is not a new one; it dates at least from the Eighteenth century. Sometimes it is a declaration of naked atheism; sometimes it means that the Christian God, the God of “New Testament mythology” has been put to rest. Not that the post-Orthodox West or the rest of the world ever knew the true God, but now even their misconception has been eliminated. Modernity is conscious of the unpleasant truth, i.e., no God, and is determined to live without him.

“The death of God” means, therefore, that He is gone as a cultural fact; the God of the old metaphysic has vanished and no longer influences our institutions, our creativity, our morals and manners. Even the soi-disant “secular Christians” are busy redefining the “God” in whom they wish to believe, a God who will not interrupt man’s construction of a “brave new world.” This vision of an empty universe, a universe without a personal, loving God — indeed, without any deity at all — is given shattering utterance in the nihilism of the German poet, Jean Paul. His Siebenkaes, composed around 1796/7, presents “The Speech of the Dead Christ from the Top of the Universe” in which He mourns the loss of “the Supreme Father.” Jean Paul puts these terrible words into the mouth of Christ who wanders aimlessly in the land of eternal shadows.

“Now a tall and noble form, in pain without surcease, sank down from the heights on to the altar, and all the dead cried: ‘Christ! Is there a God?”

He answered, ‘none!’

The whole shadow of all the dead shook, not just the breast alone, and one after the other was torn by the shuddering.

Christ went on: ‘I went through the worlds, I ascended into the suns, and flew along the milky ways through the wastes of heaven. But there is no God. I went down as far as being cast into its shadow and looked into the abyss, and called, “Father, where art Thou?” But I heard only the eternal storm, ungoverned, and the trembling rainbow of life stood without a sun that created it, and fell drop by drop into the abyss. And when I looked up to the immeasurable world for the divine eye, it glared at me with an empty and baseless socket; and eternity lay upon chaos and gnawed it and chewed the cud. Cry on, discords, tear the shades apart with your crying. For He is not!’

(Then came the children and said) ‘Jesus! Have we no father?’ And he replied with streaming tears, ‘We are all orphans, I and you, we have no father.’

Then the discords shrieked more violently – the trembling walls of the temple broke apart – the temple and the children sank down-and the whole earth and the sun sank after them – and the whole structure of the world sank past us, in its immeasurable extent- and at the summit of immeasurable nature Christ stood and gazed down into the structure of the world shattered by the light of a thousand suns, as it were into the pit hurled into eternal night, where the suns move like miners’ lamps, and the milky ways like veins of silver.

…then tall as the supreme finite one he raised up his eyes to the void and to the unfathomable emptiness and said: ‘Stiff and silent void! Cold and eternal necessity! Mad chance! Do you know it, among yourselves? When will you smash the whole structure, and me?… How alone each is in the broad tomb of the universe! I am only by myself. O Father, O Father, where is your infinite breast that I may rest upon it? — Alas, if each I is its own fathers and creator, why can it not also be its own destroying angel?’

…Here Christ looked down, and his eyes were filled with tears, and he said, ‘Alas, once I lived upon the earth. Then I was still happy, then I still had my infinite Father, and still looked joyfully from the mountains into the infinite heaven, and pressed my pierced breast on its assuaging image, and still said in bitter death: “Father, draw your son out of the bleeding body and raise him to your heart!” Alas, you happy earth-dwellers, you still believe in him…you wretched ones, after death, your wounds will not be closed. When the wretched one lays himself down in the earth, with wounded back, to sleep into a more beautiful day, full of truth and joy and virtue, he awakes in tumultuous chaos, in eternal midnight, and no morning comes, and no healing hand, and no infinite father! You mortal beside me, if you still pray, then pray to him: otherwise you have lost him for ever.’

And as I fell down and looked into the bright structure of the world I saw the rings of the great snake of eternity rising up around the universe and falling down to coil yet again around the All, then winding a thousand times around nature, and squeezing the worlds together, crushing the infinite temple into one little church – and everything became narrow and dark and fearful— and an infinitely extended bell-clapper was about to sound times least hour and shatter the structure of the universe — when I awoke.

My soul wept with joy that it could once more worship God-and my joy and weeping and faith in him were my prayer. And as I stood up, the sun gleamed deep behind the full purple ears of corn, and peacefully cast the reflection of its evening red upon the little moon, which rose without an aurora in the morning; and between heaven and earth a joyful and passing world stretched out its brief wings and lived, as I did, in face of the infinite Father. And from the whole of nature round about me there flowed out peaceful soundws, as from distant evening bells.

Later, in the next century, Friedrich Nietzsche will say very much the same thing in his Joyous Science:

Have you not heard of the madman who lit a lantern at noonday, ran to the market place, and cried unceasingly, ‘I am looking for God! I am looking for God!’ Since there happened to be many standing there who did not believe in God, he roused great laughter. ‘Is he lost?’ said one. ‘Or gone astray like a child?’ said another. ‘Or has he hidden himself? Is he afraid of us? Has he gone on a voyage? Or emigrated?’ SO they shouted and laughed. The madman leapt into their midst, and pierced them with his glance. ‘Where has God gone?’ he cried. ‘I will tell you. We have slain Him. You and I. We are all his murderers. But how did we do it? How could we drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe out the whole horizon? What did we do, when we unchained this earth from its sun? Where is it moving to now? And where are we moving to now? Away from all suns? Backwards, sideways, forwards, in every direction? Is there an above and a below any more? Are we not wandering as through infinite nothingness? Does empty space not breathe upon us now? Is it not older now? Is not night coming and ever more night? Must we not light lanterns at noon? Do we not hear the noise of the grave-diggers, as they bury God? Do we not smell God decaying? Gods too decay! God is dead. God stays dead. And we have slain him. How shall we console ourselves, chief of all murderers? The holiest and most powerful that the world has ever possessed has ebbed its blood away beneath our knives – who will wipe this blood from our fingers? What water can make us clean? What propitiations and sacred rites will we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed to great for us? Must we not ourselves become gods, in order to seem worthy of it? There was never a greater deed, and because of it all who are born after us are part of a higher history than ever was before!’

The madman fell silent, and I looked at his hearers again. They too were silent, and looked at him with shocked eyes. At last he threw his lantern on the ground, so that it broke in pieces, and went out. ‘I come to early,’ he said, ‘it is not yet my time. This monstrous event is still on the way—it has not yet penetrated men’s ears. Lightning and thunder need time, the light of the stars needs time, deeds need time, even after they have been done, in order to be seen and heard. This deed is still further from men than the remotest stars—and yet they have done it.’

The story goes that the madman went into the several churches on the same day and sang his requiem aetarnam deo. Led out and questioned, he replied just the one thing: ‘What are the churches, if not the tombs and sepulchers of God?’ (pages 161-163 of RG Smith. Secular Christianity. New York, 1966)

There seems little coincidence in the fact that Jean Paul wrote his poem during the era of the French Revolution and Nietzsche was drawing out the implications of that event to their fullest extent. Indeed, there is no more important moment in the history of the West. The French Republic and its Declaration of the Rights of Man, with the motto: “Liberty, equality, fraternity.” Is the first serious attempt to erect a purely secular state, a state without God, a City of Man, of Humanity. Here, too, is the end of the traditional Western notion of descending political power—power conceived as “descending from God through the king; henceforth, political power will “ascend” from the people to their elected representative. In the words of Albert Camus, the condemnation of the king by the French Revolution is “at the crux of contemporary history. It symbolizes the secularization of our history and the disincarnation of the Christian God… God played a part in history through the medium of the king, but his viceroy has been killed. Therefore nothing remains but a resemblance of God, relegated to the heaven of principles” (The Rebel. New York, 1956, p. 120).

AN Orthodox might agree with Camus with a single exception. The disappearance of the French king does not signal the end of the Christian era, for, in the West, it ended long before the death of Louis XVI. For mankind that era, “the Constantinian era,” was terminated with the regicide of Tsar Nicholas II, successor to the Byzantine Emperors, charismatic ruler of God’s people. His assassination at the hands of those who were indeed heirs of the French Revolution, the Communists, is the time when “that which restrains” restrained no more: the “age of lawlessness,” “the age of apostasy” had begun. There is no more sacred monarchy, there is no more sacred nation.

TO be historically precise, the secularization of Russia began with Peter the Great, nearly seventy years before the French Revolution; and, as we know, the process of Western secularization has its roots in the Middle Ages. The French Republic was the climax of that process: the first attempt by Western man to build a new order without God. The supporters of the Revolution gave a new interpretation to the history of the human race and began to relocate heaven on earth. As Professor Carl Becker put it, the philosophers of the French Revolution (Voltaire, Diderot, Montaigne, etc.) “demolished the Heavenly City of St. Augustine only to rebuild it with more up-to-date (secular) materials.” Thus, for God was substituted Humanity, for the Saint the genius, for divine wisdom science, “for hope of immortality in heaven, the hope of living memory of future generations,” to quote Becker once more.

Everywhere through the following century, the significance of the French Revolution was diligently examined. No people were more zealous in their work and none more portentious in their conclusions than the Germans. The first name which comes to mind is George Hegel (1770-1830). A devout Lutheran, Hegel saw that the Revolution called for a new defense of Christianity. He gave his contemporaries a secularized version of it. The only response to the atheism and the deism of the French, he said, was a theology of Immanence: the Trinity became the very world-process itself. Nature was a manifestation of the Absolute, so he referred to God; man was God come to historical consciousness.

When Hegel died in 1830, he had many disciples, not all of whom agreed with his philosophy. Heinrich Heine, the Jewish essayist, described the “Young Hegelians” as “these godless, self-gods” who with their master, had murdered God. “Hear ye not the bells sounding?”, he lamented. “Kneeel down. They bring the sacraments ot a dying God.” The particular objects of his enmity: David Strauss, Ludwig Feuerbach, Max Stirner [Johann Kasper Schmidt], and [Kike] Karl Marx. This group will also earn the wrath of Dostoyevsky who became acquainted with their ideas through the Russian anarchists, Bellinski and Bakunin.

Among others who wrote works of a similar character was Strauss, who wrote in 1835 his famous The Life of Jesus Critically Examined. His intent was to entirely discredit Christian “supernaturalism” or “transcendentalism.” At the same time, he taught that the entire human race is the unity of God and man. The Incarnation did not take place at one moment in time and to one man, but it has been happening from all eternity. “Humanity is the union of two natures—God become man, the infinite manifest in the finite…” he declared in The Life of Jesus. Christ was only the supreme example of that unity. Strauss argued, furthermore, that nature itself “pulses within the womb of the divine.” Like Hegel, then, he was also a pantheist. Everything for him was divine: all phenomena a manifestation of the Absolute.

No one seemed more impressed with Strauss than Ludwig Feuerbach. He was not a pantheist, but a materialist. Spirit did not exist for him. Strauss had made it clear that man was indeed at the center of things. From that notion, Feuerbach developed his theory that man is “God.” All questions about God, he said, are really questions about man. To affirm God is to deny man as to affirm man is to deny God. His magnum opus, the Essence of Christianity, was written to demonstrate such assertions.

The true sense of theology is anthropology, he wrote. The God of Christian theology is only a dream of the human heart, an awareness of man’s own infinity. Therefore, God is nothing more than a projection of man’s true self, of his ideal being. Feuerbach blamed religion for man’s alienation from himself: it led him to worship a phantom. The elimination of religion will mean that man will overcome that “alienation” and uncover his true self. He will come to realize that all the attributes-omnipotence, omniscience, goodness, justice, etc. – heaped on “the Supreme Being” really belong to himself, to his ideal self. Man will only be happy, then, with the disappearance of religion.

With this kind of thinking, Max Stirner, another disciple of Hegel, evolved his own philosophy—a philosophy of total egotism. His The Ego and His Own is the attempt to delineate what Stirner meant by the uniqueness of the individual, the ego. “I have set my cause on nothing,” he wrote. Nothing “concerns” me, nothing but myself—not mankind, not truth, not freedom, not love, not justice, not fatherland, nothing but myself. Each man is his own cause: man is god to himself. Stirner despised “organized religion,” because it always demanded self-sacrifice. Nothing was more immoral to Stirner. Also, he despised the French Enlightenment, because this movement offered the world the idea of “equality.” Equality, he grumbled, forces me to be like others, to think of the rights of others: it breeds mediocrity. “But nature entitles me to nothing. If I can win a status or privilege, I will take it. I take it by my superior power.” The world can survive only with the genius, the great man, the superior talent or, what Nietzche will later call, uebermensch.

Stirner’s natural enemy was Karl Marx, who opposed to Stirner’s Egotism his own socio-economic collectivism. Marx, as a materialist, could only interpret history in terms of that materialism which meant, as he said so often, the struggle of economic classes. The lack of equality and the existence of egotism has produced misery and injustice. Religion is largely responsible for the unhappiness that man has endured hitherto. He not only believes in a God which is no more than a projection of himself, but he yearns for a heaven which does not exist and cannot exist, save for here on earth. Religion keeps him from this truth: it acts on him as a drug—“religion is an opiate.”

If men are ever to find happiness, they must forget their superstitions and band together to fight those very natural things which prevent it. Negatively, this means the establishment of “the truth of the world” by unmasking “human self-alienation” and, positively, to convert religion and theology to law and politics. Once it is affirmed that “man is the supreme being for man,” then, human consciousness will be raised and we shall become “a new species of being” (Gattungswesen). Only this “new man” will be able to live in the new order, a world in which equality prevails, exploitation ceases, conflict, injustice, hatred, slavery and privilege have withered away. At that moment, love, freedom and plenty will characterize human life. Marx, Socialism and secularism in general are eschatological, utopian, and future-oriented, anticipating a new world on earth.

Until that time, however, revolution is necessary: it is necessary because the privileged will not surrender their power voluntarily for the common good. In particular, Marx wanted the eradication of private property, because those who possess always exploit those who do not possess; and the latter is always envious of the former. IN addition, the possessor always puts his interest before the interest of all. Private property precludes any serious possibility of common action against the enemies of mankind. Society must be united, integrated, if the enemies of man are to be eradicated. There is, too, a certain danger to the common good in the family, because its members work for the survival and prosperity of a unit of society rather than the whole of it.

Those who have the most to lose by the status quo, Marx said, is the “working class,” the proletariat. No one is more exploited and oppressed, as history proves. That class will take its rightful place only with the elimination of all classes, when all men contribute their talents for the good of all. Meanwhile, the proletariat must spearhead the revolution, acting together with other oppressed peoples, in order to achieve their common socio-economic goals. The “capitalist” must be forced to pay a just wage, an action which will lead him to capitulate more and more of his power and which will eventually bring him down. Marx had a lingering fear that the proletariat would settle for security; it must be constantly pushed. Lenin used the word “vanguard” to describe the leaders of the people, an elite which would inform and inspire them.

Now, we are aware that the onus for secularism cannot be laid entirely at the feet of Hegel, Marx and their followers. The Nineteenth century was filled with sages and scientists who wished to displace what they believed to be the Christian world-view, the Christian “mythology.” What makes Marxism and Hegelianism the object of special treatment is the special deference the Twentieth century pays to them. No one doubts the impact of Marxism on our milieu; and it is a tribute to Hegel that every important secular philosophical movement of this century began with an attack upon his doctrine. Nevertheless, his spirit pervades them all—existentialism, phenomenology, pragmatism, logical analysis. It is noteworthy, too, that there is at present a Feuerbachian revival, probably as an addendum to Socialism.

The last century, moreover, is a time of unprecedented advances in the physical sciences. They claimed and continue to claim the territory once held by religion. For example, who can deny the immense significance of Darwin? His theory of evolution eliminated the need for any spiritual explanation of life on this planet. Darwin drove God from the earth as Newton, a hundred years before, drove him from the heavens. And, too, how shall we forget the technological discoveries which have become for us now the source of every good thing, a “source” which men in former times called “Beneficent and Merciful God.”

But, of course, the Ninteenth century struck down, once and for all, the so-called “God-hypothesis;” or, indeed, if there was to be some kind of deity to explain the design of the universe and the maintenance of its laws, this “god” was hardly personal, hardly anything we could worshipl instead, science and philosophy has permitted us a “force,” a “life,” “the Ãlan vital” of Henri Bergson. The God of Christianity, the Blessed Trinity, is gone. He has evaporated so quietly, so gradually from government, from theater, music, painting, sculpture, poetry, education, mores and family living, that His passing is hardly noticed.

If this God of the Prophets, Apostles and Fathers stubbornly persists, if the true God still lurks somewhere in the dark recesses of the universe, it is in the hearts of the lonely and despised men or in “reactionary institutions” such as the Russian Church Abroad. Undoubtedly, men everywhere want the consolation and inspiration of religion, but they want no creeds and canons, no discipline and dogma. If they want a Bible at all, they want to bend it to their understanding. More and more they want the peace and salvation the world can give, for these do not convict them of sin.

B. Pluralism

With “the death of God,” the mind is left stranded, without criteria from which to function. When I use the word God, of course, I mean a personal Creator-God. Only a God Who speaks with man, Who communicates with His creatures, Who enlightens them, has any meaning for the problem of knowledge. Aristotle’s “Unmoved Mover” or the Hindu “Brahman” or Hegel’s “Absolute” are useless to us. They do not love us, they do not reveal the truth to us, they do not change our hearts. Thus, “the death of God” deprives us of those foundations which make knowledge possible, which allow us to receive and apply the truth. Without God, truth cannot be distinguished from falsehood. Nothing at all can be known with any certainty.

Since there is no absolute criterion, truth must forever elude us and we are condemned to live by the arbitrary rule of “tolerance” or, as modern sociologists and political theorists say, “pluralism.” Necessarily then, just as no sex, race or ethnic groupcan claim superiority over others, no religion may claim to be the “true religion,” that is, a religion established by God for all men. Obviously, since God is “dead” or absent or indifferent, we can only believe, each in his own way, in what we choose to call good and evil, true and false, right and wrong. Logically, then, the modern secular state can be linked with no particular religion. Secularism demands pluralism which automatically precludes a privileged position to any religion.

It is no wonder that ecumenism must take the same position. It may believe that the Church is divided and one day will be reunited, but in the meantime ecumenism must accept an “alliance of traditions.” Doctrinal differences may not be taken seriously, because the full truth is not yet achieved. Without that truth, ecumenical dialogue is in vain. Some ecumenists have come to just that conclusion: pluralism means that either we dismiss doctrinal divergence as meaningless (and thereby offend some of the membership) or we find some common basis by which to justify the continued existence of “the movement for Christian unity.” The answer: common social action, the pursuit of social justice and equality— such as running guns to African terrorists and revolutionaries and disseminating information about birth control. In a word, supporting every secular cause on the face of the glove. As one ecumenist at the Zagorsk meeting in 1968 said, “Let the world write the agenda of the council.”

No doubt one still hears traditional religious concepts and language at ecumenical meetings, but, if they were ever understood Biblically and Patristically by the post-Orthodox West, their authentic meaning is rapidly deteriorating. The words God and Church and Christ do not have the same connotation for all members of the World and National Council of Churches, not even from the inception of these organizations. Such movements have always been implicitly pluralistic. Perhaps, initially some viewed “tolerance” as a suspension of hostilities, a way of promoting genuine love and unity, but pluralism has become an ecumenical dogma. Indeed, there is a new perception of the Church and the world because there is a new perception of God. Recent developments in the metaphysic of becoming and immanence have strongly influenced the ecumenical movement, especially the teachings of Tillich, Bonhoeffer, Bultmann, Barth, Heideggar and, yes, Marx himself.

Inevitably, the Orthodox Church is just another “tradition,” “experience” or “denomination.” Most Orthodox ecumenists are either ignorant or insensitive to the danger which this movement represents. Some of them bask in their fame and delusion. For example, Patriarch Demetrius, Archbishops Iakovos and Bartholomaios believe that uncompromising loyalty to any “Confession” is “religious fanaticism.” They support the idea that the new Orthodox Council, which the Patriarch of Constantinople has proposed, is for the promotion of Christian unity and the opening of the Orthodox Church towards Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, “towards contemporary (secular) culture, with its aspirations for brotherhood…” (Pat. Christ. Ency., 1977).

Such a belief is a tacit denial of the finality and infallibility of Gods’ revelation. The ecumenical Patriarch and his followers are conducting a revolution of their own. They seem totally oblivious to te fact that they are advocating pluralism and introducing secularism into the Orthodox Church. They like to think of their opponents as “religious fanatics” who refuse to face the realities of the modern world. But it is they who are not facing those realities, it is they who fail to comprehend the radical significance of the times through which we are now passing.

There is one more aspect of this unhappy situation that we should mention — the secular attack upon monasticism in which many Orthodox ecumenists have not failed to join. On the ideological spectrum, monasticism and pluralism are polar opposites. The one is “other-worldly” and the other a product of “this-worldliness.” The first is the ideal life, the pattern for all life, the model and criterion of all human existence and, as St. Basil declared, “the monk is the true and authentic Christian.” The second, pluralism, reduces monasticism to an option, reshaped, of course, to accommodate modernity, for in its traditional form monasticism is the negative of secularism. Ecumenists and/or “secular Christians” believe a compromise is possible; that the way of the monk and the way of the world may be reconciled. The result, of course, is simply to reduce monasticism to a secular service.

A Jesuit, E. Larkin, has, for example, called for monastic reform. “Whereas the Christian of yesterday feared egoism and worldliness and tended to seek God outside the world in pure adoration,” he states with some exaggeration, “the Christian of today begins with himself and the world as he finds them and expects to find God there.” The Christian of today views “efforts to neutralize or frustrate inordinate love as something outside the axis of the spiritual endeavor. He is less concerned with purification than with commitment, and for him the means of action, work, is doing for others. He is very optimistic, sometimes quite presumptuous, in the appropriating human motivations and identifying his projects as the work of the Lord. He accepts difficulties: he knows he must rise above ambivalent or selfish feelings and overcome frustrations, ingratitude and other obstacles…”

One may question in what sense the Rev. Larkin is talking about monasticism or even Christianity. There is no mention of holiness as the presupposition to goodness or Grace as the presupposition to holiness. His entire article, “Asceticism and Modern Life” (1963) pays absolutely no deference to doctrinal truth and there is very little allusion to “asceticism.” Monasticism is become just another, but differently organized form of service to man. It is a service which ultimately is no more than self-service.

That the secularist, as a pluralist and relativist, must repudiate or dilute monasticism is the supreme irony of the dream to build a new world. He may learn to late that he has cut away the very foundations of civilization and, if he thinks at all about heavenly immortality, the very possibility of salvation.

C. Relativism

Relativism is the Siamese twin of pluralism. In the vernacular, we say, “doing your own thing.” This means the ability to do what I wish without criticism; to do it in my own way. Since there are no universal, necessary and public criteria for conduct, my actions, my “life-style” cannot be judged to be right or wrong. Choice is a matter of taste not law. God is “dead” or, at least, “absent”: there is no commandment, no unimpeachable principle, no sacred injunction. Morality is a personal attitude, a perception, a preference, a value. The Anglican bishop, John Robinson, in his popular book, Honest to God, describes the morality of the Bible as “legalism.” It forces men to live by external and abstract laws, he insists, rather than freely and creatively.

In point of fact, I can do what I want, even murder and suicide, for, as Dostoyevsky said, “If there is no God, all things are permissible.” If I wish to kill you for the sake of my cause, my revolution, my whim, none may condemn me. If I wish to kill myself, no one should prevent me. Dostoyevsky goes further in The Possessed, arguing that relativism — which implies there is no God — demands the highest form of self-will, that is suicide. Kirillov is bound to show his self-will, says the Russian novelist, because it is the only way for him to demonstrate his conviction that God does not exist. “I am bound to show my unbelief,” exclaims Kirillov, walking around the room. “I cannot understand how an atheist could know there is no God and not kill himself on the spot. To recognize there is no God and not to recognize at the same moment that one is god is an absurdity, else one could certainly kill oneself… So I must certainly kill myself to prove that I am god…”

I suspect that not many people would surrender to Kirillov’s logic. Rather they have adjusted to or happily embraced relativism or self-will. Of course, it is an old idea, an idea first propounded by the ancient Greeks. The Cynics and Epicureans espoused it. In modern times, it has won a new popularity. The most famous book in recent times on the subject of relativism and morality is Joseph Fletcher’s Situation Ethics: The New Morality, published in 1966. He maintains that the terms “right” and “wrong” are relative to the “situation,” that is, “we cannot approach every decision-making occasion with a whole apparatus of prefabricated rules and regulations.” The only guide for human conduct is my conscience and the Holy Spirit. He informs me according to the needs of the “situation.”

For example, there is no law which states that sexual activity is always wrong before marriage. We have no right, Fletcher scolds, to label pre-marital sexuality as fornication; it may or may not be. Fletcher agrees with Bishop Robinson that “chastity is chastity only if it is charity—caring enough. And this is the criterion for every form of behavior, inside of marriage or out of it, in sexual ethics or in any other field. For nothing else makes it right or wrong…” In other words, we live for persons and not by laws. The “loving thing to do in a particular situation” is “the right and good thing to do.” One cannot say that living together without benefit of marriage is necessarily wrong. For instance; indeed not, for if it is “the loving thing to do,” the Holy Spirit is present.

Fletcher’s theory is, if I may say so, as superfluous as it is silly. Moral relativism requires no guidance from the Holy Spirit. IN any case, there is no way to determine the Presence of the Spirit; neither can we maintain that love is the sign of His Presence. Not only do we often confuse love and lust, but there is no reason to believe that love is the sign of anything more than my own attitude. Whatever Professor Fletcher may have intended, there is simply no way to reconcile relativism and Christianity. IN fact, there is no need: God is “dead” and pluralism, along with relativism, is the order of the day. There are many life-styles, none of which can or should be refuted. Even Biblical morality has a place. Yet, any course of action is a “value-judgment,” good to him who wants it. One may not even condemn murder, assassination or terrorism by appealing to “the dignity of man” or the “rights” of the individual. Everyone has his own understanding of these clichÃs. Besides, there is no right or wrong except to him that thinks it is. I cannot be criticized for anything I do, because there is no sin or, to be more exact, sin is relative. If you think fornication is sinful, that is your business; but you cannot impose your opinion on others.

Relativism, as you now, has a far wider application than morality; it enervates religion, politics, art, etc. The consequence is terrible, because all communication must break down between persons and groups. Relativism renders anything outside my self-will, anything impartial and objective, impossible tor each. Conflict is inevitable. As Thucydides, long before Karl Marx, said: relativism invites compulsion and strife. Marx observed that the rights of one individual or group must sometimes clash; the class or individual that prevails, must resort to force—revolution, if necessary. There is the force of the ballot which imposes the will of the many on the few; and there is the more drastic force of violence. In a few words, “might makes right.”

By now the connection between “the Death of God,” pluralism and relativism should be clear. If there is no God, no personal God, then, we may do and believe what we wish in the way we want, anything from the most detestable and inhumane to the most imaginative and bizarre. Secularists consider the growing state of anarchy, lawlessness and apostasy as temporary. They anticipate that a new and perfect unity will emerge from it. Secularism is, then, the futile search for a rational, man-centered world-order. Here is its entire hope, its faith-one which seems very familiar. It was Adam, was it not, who first wished to place his destiny in his own hands; Adam who wanted to be a “god?” How strange, how ironical, for that was precisely God’s Plan for His creation. He intended that man should become divine, that he should share His Life through participation in the divine energies.


Secularism is a faith, a faith in man, a faith in his future, a future without God or, as the Process theologians say, a future which is God. Orthodoxy is a faith, a faith in God, a living God which it is “meet and right to hymn, to bless, to praise, to thank, to worship,” for He is a God of Mercy and Justice and Power. Secularism was born of a false theology, or more precisely, of a decaying post-Orthodox Wesetern theology. It is an observable decay from Aquinas in the Thirteenth century to Max Scheler in the Twentieth century: a traceable continuum of ideas, a rationalism of the most presumptuous kind.

Secularism is the creature of Western man. He is responsible for what we have euphemistically called “the changing environment.” As Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote from his Nazi prison more than three decades ago, “Western civilization is about to deny its historical heritage as such. Western civilization is inimical to Christ. That is the peculiar situation of our times and its real decadence.” That denial has been labeled a “revolution,” as indeed it is: a far more reaching and radical revolution than the world has ever seen, infecting every level of culture. Anything “traditional” is not only discarded but discredited. The past is being “salted” and the ground turned over.

The secular revolution has no place for God or, at least, no place for the traditional God. It demands a new concept, if any at all. If there is to be a deity, he must be “the ground of being” or some evolving cosmic principle, anything but a deity, as Nietzsche pouted, that will arous guilt or pity and interfere in my life. This “force” or “ground” of things itself will be perfected with man and the universe in the future—in that new and glorious age. At the same time, a new idea of God implies a new idea of man and, of course, a new idea of nature: sinless but imperfect, man is master of his destiny and nature is his responsibility.

What does this hope for a new world-view mean for the Church and for religion in general? If there is to be a place for them, it is as private preference. The Church as an institiution is entirely historical, even as “God” is something immanent and developing. If She is to survive, if She is to make Her contribution to “the brave new world,” She must begin to thinkof Herself as a wholly natural organization and way of life. She must understand that She, even as people, has no privileges, no quality or power which sets Her above other religions. As all men are “equal,” so are religions. Moreover, She must “demythologize” Her Bible and traditions: all their teachings about the supernatural must be sociologically and philosophically reinterpreted (e.g., the Resurrection signifies the exaltation of mankind). Christ, of course, was simply “a man for others;” doctrines, dogmas, and canons are neither infallible nor absolute, for in a pluralistic and relativistic world, nothing has such attributes. The Mysteries of the Church are symbols of human love and unity; and asceticism, although a “rejection of the world,” is a rejection of the status quo, of the world as it is now; and mysticism is the union of one member of humanity with the whole, the vision of complete harmony and love.

What can the Orthodox Church do in the face of such a challenge, a challenge She must meet if She is to fulfill Her divine Mission? Firstly, let us remember that the Church has always known that this challenge would come. The Saints have for centuries predicted the coming of these times, of this “age of lawlessness,” of this “age of apostasy.” Secondly, the Orthodox People, as God’s People, are Stewards of God’s Revelation, His Treasure. He has stored that Treasure in earthen vessles, to be sure, but he has also sent us the Holy Spirit to guard it. For that reason, too, the Church is “the ground and pillar of Truth:” She cannot err, She cannot lie, She cannot willfully deceive, because the Holy Spirit guides Her into all Truth. Thirdly, we are obliged to “hold fast,” as individual members of the Church, to the Tradition which Christ delivered to the Apostles. Our fidelity to that Tradition brings us sanctification, a sanctification which renders us, lights to them who dwell in darkness.

The Faith we preserve has not developed or changed. The Church has not been seduced by Plato or Aristotle or Freud or [the Kike] Darwin or [the Kike] Marx. She has never found it necessary to follow current trends and fashions to make Her Message appealing. Indeed, She is no beggar of souls. Moreover, She belongs to no century. She is not, therefore, a Twentieth century Church, but the Church in the twentieth century. She exists to change, not to be changed. The Orthodox Church has a Message for the modern world, the same one Christ preached almost two thousand years ago—“Repent! The Kingdom of God is at hand!” Here is the essence of the Gospel, here is the answer to poverty, crime, racism, war, leadership, mores and manners, sex and feminism, egalitarianism, fraternalism and supposed liberty—to all the human problems, national and international. The Church’s answers are sacred not secular, because Her voice is the voice of eternity.

[Source: St. Nicholas Educational Society, Roslindale, Mass., 1978]


Saint John:

"Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another."


If the shoe fits! Sarah Jessica Parker takes a time out on the streets of the Big Apple to fasten little Marion's boot

By SHYAM DODGE, 23 April 2013

It's a parent's job to make things better for their children.

And while Sarah Jessica Parker takes her duties seriously, they are clearly not a chore for the mother-of-three.

The recognizable star was the picture of maternal bliss as she helped three-year-old Marion Loretta reaffix an uncomfortable shoe in New York, on Tuesday.

Time out in New York: Sarah Jessica Parker reaffixed Loretta's boot while twin sister Tabitha looked on in the Big Apple, on Tuesday

Time out in New York: Sarah Jessica Parker reaffixed Marion's boot while twin sister Tabitha looked on in the Big Apple, on Tuesday

Sarah Jessica, 48, led her twin girls Tabitha and Marion on a stroll through the frigid streets of the Big Apple.

The adorable girls held their mother's hand dressed in nearly matching outfits.

Trendy trio: The mother-of-three walked hand-in-hand with Tabitha (L) and Loretta (R) who wore matching blue jackets

Trendy trio: The mother-of-three walked hand-in-hand with Tabitha (L) and Loretta (R) who wore matching blue jackets

Help me mommy! Little Loretta had something wrong with her boot

Help me mommy! Little Loretta had something wrong with her boot

Tabitha wore pink tights and lady bug Uggs while sporting a white shirt-dress.

Blonde Marion donned similar tights as her sister but in a grey tone.

Foot massage: The doting parent investigated the problem with her daughter's footwear

Foot massage: The doting parent investigated the problem with her daughter's footwear

Maternal bliss: The 48-year-old clearly enjoys her parental duties

Maternal bliss: The 48-year-old clearly enjoys her parental duties

Continuing her comfy trend, the young girl chose a pink shirt-dress for the day out, but matched her sibling with lady bug footwear and a blue snow jacket.

The final departure from her twin sister was a knit headband adorning her flaxen head.

But the fair-haired girl soon appeared uncomfortable and the Failure To Launch star stopped mid-step to check on the youngster.

Adorable pair: Sarah Jessica held little Tabitha's hand as she beamed a smile at a friend

Adorable pair: Sarah Jessica held little Tabitha's hand as she beamed a smile at a friend

Mother of chic: The Sex And The City star donned grey pedal pusher and canvas boots for the casual outing

Mother of chic: The Sex And The City star donned grey pedal pusher and canvas boots for the casual outing

The family quickly sat down on a concrete stoop of a classic New York Brownstone to check on the little one's boot.

Brandishing an ear-to-ear grin the chic mother slipped her daughter's shoe off to investigate.

After managing a prompt remedy the lovely mother experienced a bit of discomfort herself, resulting in what looked to be a sneeze.

But all was soon back in order and the trio were off for more adventures in the exciting city.

Fashion mavens: The trio embodied New York cool as they took a leisurely stroll in the cold spring morning

Fashion mavens: The trio embodied New York cool as they took a leisurely stroll in the cold spring morning

Not to be outdone by her girls, Sarah Jessica sported canvas boots and grey pedal pushers.

Completing her casual but trendy ensemble the famous actress wore a grey Golden Goose T-shirt, a faux fur-lined jacket and sunglasses as her hair was held in place by a topknot.

Meanwhile, Sarah Jessica spoke to People of her daughters' style senses at the Tiffany & Co. Blue Book Ball on Wednesday, saying: 'They pick out their own clothes every single day. They won’t listen. I just provide the clothing and a lot of those dresses they wear are from my childhood or my niece’s young childhood.'

Bless you! The famous actress appeared to be taken by an unexpected sneeze

Bless you! The famous actress appeared to be taken by an unexpected sneeze

She went on to explain: 'We have a routine. They pick out their clothes at three o’clock when they wake up from their nap.

'We tell them nothing. We just give them the temperature outside and if they don’t pick enough clothing, then we say, "You need leggings or pants. You need to add something so you’ll be warm enough." That’s all they would listen to.'

Sarah Jessica also described the differences between the twin fashionistas: 'One is more serious than the other. Loretta will sometimes say, "Mama, can you help me with my bundle." Bundles are what we make for the next morning. But Tabitha is completely on her own. She’s extremely independent.'

Read More: Sarah Jessica Parker: My Twin Daughters Dress Themselves




Jailed in secret - for trying to rescue her father from care home where she believed he would die

Wanda Maddocks is first person to be imprisoned by Court of Protection

It settles the affairs of people too ill to make their own decisions

Jailed because she ignored orders not to try to remove her father from home

By Steve Doughty and Andy Dolan, Daily Mail, 23 April 2013

Comments (191)

Wanda Maddocks was jailed 'in secret' for trying to remove her father from a care home where his family thought he was in danger of dying

Wanda Maddocks, 50, is the first person known to be imprisoned by the Court of Protection, which settles the affairs of people too ill to make their own decisions.

A judge ruled that she should go to prison for five months for contempt of court even though she was not present or represented by a lawyer.

Details of the case were made public for the first time yesterday and provoked a fresh row over behind-closed-doors justice.

Miss Maddocks, who served six weeks of her sentence, was jailed because she ignored the court’s orders not to try to remove her father John from the home.

She was condemned for incidents including taking the 80-year-old dementia sufferer to a court hearing and to see a solicitor.

She was also censured for producing a leaflet to try to publicise details of the case and giving her father a wooden cross ‘to ward off evil’ in the care home.

Her family said Mr Maddocks, a retired painter and decorator from Stoke-on-Trent, had been held ‘like a prisoner’ on the orders of a local council.

Miss Maddocks was initially not allowed to be named after the hearing and was identified only by her initials WM.

And the court’s ruling containing details of her sentence was not published.

The Court of Protection is a branch of the High Court and its hearings are always conducted in private.

Judge Martin Cardinal merely went through the motions of observing open justice when he handed down his sentence.

He ordered the doors of his courtroom in Birmingham to be unlocked and told ushers to announce in the corridor that members of the public were free to come in.

But there was no wider announcement of the judgment and no-one who was not directly involved is thought to have attended.

The ban on naming Miss Maddocks was lifted because there was no reason for it to remain in place after her release. Mr Maddocks has since died.

He separated from wife June more than 30 years ago. She remarried but now suffers from Parkinson’s Disease.

The extraordinary case began when the grandfather-of-one was found collapsed at his own home last year.

He was placed in a care home and the local authority applied for a legal order which said he must stay there.

These are introduced when officials believe someone could be at risk of harm, and put the Official Solicitor in charge of their affairs.

After a few months Miss Maddocks’ brother Ivan took him out of the care home for lunch.

Miss Maddocks was alerted and flew her father to Turkey, where she owns a number of properties.

They stayed for 13 weeks before returning to Britain, and her father went to a different care home.

Mr Maddocks said: ‘Wanda was certain she could care for him herself but the social services said he had to be put in the home. Wanda was very angry that they were taking Dad away from us.’

Miss Maddocks, a former buy-to-let landlord, was jailed on September 11 last year after the sentencing in her absence by the Court of Protection in Birmingham.

[Photo: Miss Maddocks was jailed on September 11 last year after the sentencing in her absence by the Court of Protection in Birmingham, and sent to Foston Hall prison in Derby]

She was freed from Foston Hall prison in Derby on November 1 after returning to the court to purge her contempt by apologising to the judge.

Judge Cardinal said in his ruling that ‘there is a history of the family being difficult with the local authority’ and that Miss Maddocks knew she had been ordered not to interfere with her father.

He said she had done so on a number of occasions. On one she took him from his care home to attend a court hearing. On another she took him to Birmingham to talk to a solicitor.

The judge recorded that she also gave her father a wooden cross ‘to prevent the evil in the home from hurting him’.

[Photo: John Maddocks was being held in a care home against his families wishes under the Labour government's Mental Capacity Act]

Miss Maddocks also ‘produced and distributed a leaflet prior to and during the final hearing giving details of the case, containing a photograph of her father and other information so as to identify him and that is in breach of Court of Protection rules.’

Miss Maddocks was said to have left a long and abusive message on a social worker’s voicemail describing ‘you in your tarty little stuck up voice’ and to have called council staff names including ‘arrogant little cunning b*******’.

In one message she said: ‘I hope you all end up where my Dad is and I hope you all end up cursed.’

Judge Cardinal said she had ‘the attitude of someone who is simply not going to obey court orders’.

He said Miss Maddocks was causing her father ‘very considerable grief’ and ‘it seems to be only right she should go to prison’.

But the whistleblowing MP who first learned of the case, Lib Dem John Hemming, said: ‘The jailing of people in secret for contempt is not supposed to happen.

‘No records have been collected. I believe the judges have broken the rules of their own courts, but nobody is doing anything about it.’

‘One of the charges against the woman was that she took her father from his care home to see a solicitor. We now live in a country where ordinary people get locked up for taking their father to see a lawyer. Even in Iran they do not jail people for taking legal advice.’

Councillor Gwen Hassall, Stoke-on-Trent city council cabinet member for social services, said: ‘This is clearly an extreme case, but one that the Court of Protection supported the council on. It was the court’s decision to issue a custodial sentence to Wanda Maddocks.

‘Our chief concern was always centred around the welfare of her father, who was suffering from a deteriorating condition and required 24-hour supervision in a stable environment.

‘This was a decision reached by medical consultants, geriatricians, social workers, community psychiatric nurses, dieticians, consultant health and nursing professionals and others who were involved in assessing his needs.’

She added: ‘This decision was also ratified by the Court of Protection, which carried out its own independent assessment of his needs.

‘Unfortunately safeguards had to be put in place to ensure he had the support of a stable environment because there were no signs that this could be provided otherwise.

'Safeguards also had to be put in place to protect the care professionals who looked after Mr Maddocks.’

The sinister spread of justice behind closed doors, writes Christopher Brooker

Today’s revelations in the Mail about Wanda Maddocks, the woman imprisoned by a judge for trying to remove her 80-year-old father from a care home where he was being held against his family’s wishes, are truly shocking.

Most disturbing of all is that it is only thanks to persistent inquiries by the Mail that we know of her fate at all — for the court heard the case in secret and chose not to publish the ruling containing details of her sentence.

The court that conducted itself in this manner is the mysterious and secretive Court of Protection, set up in 2005 under the Labour government’s Mental Capacity Act to give state officials quite extraordinary powers over the lives of people who are deemed no longer fit to handle their own affairs.

Miss Maddocks was found guilty of contempt because she ignored the Court of Protection’s orders not to interfere with her father’s life in the care home.

[Photo: What angered the judge and the council involved, Stoke-on-Trent, was not just that Miss Maddocks took father away but that she desperately tried to publicise what was happening to him]

What angered the judge and the council involved, Stoke-on-Trent, was not just that she took her father away but that she desperately tried to publicise what was happening to him by writing a leaflet about it.

Of course, the case is complicated and highly emotive — one in which family members concerned for their ailing, elderly father are pitted against professionals and state employees who insist they know better.

But it is also part of a deeply worrying trend of secret justice taking hold across Britain, where journalists, the public and even defendants are barred from hearing evidence, while those in the dock often have no legal representation.

The Court of Protection is making huge numbers of judgments in secret which devastate families such as that of Wanda Maddocks.

Only this week, there was the tragic case of a 64-year-old mother from a working-class family who left her husband and ran off with her neighbour to the Midlands, without an explanation.

The family spent months trying to track her down, and finally found her in a nursing home after she had suffered a massive stroke that left her needing 24-hour care. When they called to see her, the nursing home — claiming she had written letters saying she wanted to break off contact with them — called the police.

After hearing the evidence in secret, the judge decided the family should no longer have contact with their mother — even though an American forensic expert who used computer analysis on handwriting testified that he was ‘99.9 per cent’ certain the letters were written by the man she ran off with.

For months I have been following a terrifying case involving a council which cannot be named, and which has similarly been hidden away from public view by another judge of the same Court of Protection.

The story would make your hair curl. But because it is under the aegis of the Court of Protection, I am forbidden from reporting on it at all. None of its details can be made public.

Local press that did cover the story so irked the council and the judge that other media were told that any further reporting of the case would be a contempt of court, punishable by imprisonment.

Like the case of Miss Maddocks, it highlights a tendency to allow Britain’s courts to hide their workings from public view behind a wall of secrecy.

The Mail mounted a hard-hitting campaign for open justice after the Government proposed last year that judges could be allowed to hold secret hearings in terrorist cases, on the grounds that allowing these to be reported might be damaging to ‘national security’.

Similar concerns have been expressed over the fear that the Leveson inquiry might trigger a massive extension in the powers of judges to throw up a blanket of secrecy around other types of cases they are hearing, such as those involving celebrities keen to preserve their reputation.

But the terrifying fact is that we already have a whole swathe of secret courts in this country, where judges are allowed to exclude the public and the Press, and to issue draconian gagging orders to prevent anything being reported of what goes on.

Any breach of those orders can be ruled a contempt of court, punishable not just by imprisonment but by the confiscation of an offender’s possessions.

One of the most glaring examples of justice behind closed doors is to be found in the extraordinary goings on of our so-called ‘child protection’ system, where social workers using family courts can too often tear families apart for the flimsiest and most dubious of reasons.

In such cases, all the normal principles of British justice can be turned on their heads. The rules, which in criminal courts require evidence to be put to a proper test, can be routinely ignored.

Social workers and lawyers can trot out hearsay allegations which are accepted by the court as if they were proven fact, ‘expert psychologists’ are paid thousands of pounds to come up with patently ridiculous reports, which parents fearful that they may lose their children for ever are not permitted to question.

Police could soon be banned from identifying people they have arrested by a recommendation of the Leveson Inquiry

What is so shocking to parents who fall foul of this system — as I have learned from talking to scores of them over the years — is how they can find themselves being treated, without any need for proof, as criminals, having to listen to any kind of allegation being made against them without being given a right of reply.

The point is that none of these abuses could take place if the judges had not been allowed to hide away the workings of these courts behind a far greater wall of secrecy than anything intended by the politicians who passed the supposedly well-meaning Acts of Parliament which gave them their powers in the first place.

The overwhelming moral of all this is that wherever courts are allowed to operate in secret, the system is likely to be corrupted.

Few things are more sinister in Britain today than all those pressures to extend even further that suffocating blanket of secrecy, for we can already see — as in the frightening case of Miss Maddocks and the Court of Protection — how easily it can lead to any sense of justice being thrown out of the window.



PM losing patience with human rights court as Qatada wins again: Cameron considers temporary withdrawal to finally remove hate preacher

Government cannot take deportation campaign to the Supreme Court

Decision means it is very likely Qatada can stay in UK indefinitely

Home Office to appeal again to kick out 'dangerous man'

By James Chapman and Jack Doyle, Daily Mail, 23 April 2013

Comments (999)

David Cameron is considering a temporary withdrawal from the European human rights convention in order to finally remove Abu Qatada from Britain.

The Prime Minister held a ‘council of war’ with senior ministers yesterday to find a way of deporting the hate preacher to his native Jordan to face terror charges, according to sources.

Home Secretary Theresa May, Justice Secretary Chris Grayling and Attorney General Dominic Grieve were summoned for talks at Downing Street shortly before the Government discovered it had lost the latest round in an interminable legal battle to remove the terror suspect.

[Photo: David Cameron is considering a temporary withdrawal from the European human rights convention in order to finally remove Abu Qatada from Britain]

[Photo: Remaining in Britain? Abu Qatada has won the latest court case today in his long running legal battle to avoid deportation]

Sources said Mr Cameron had declared Qatada’s continued presence in Britain ‘intolerable’ and insisted even the most controversial options must be considered.

[Photo: Appeal: Theresa May had hoped to take the case against Qatada to the Supreme Court]

Downing Street refused to say what had been discussed, but it is understood that one possibility is Britain temporarily leaving the European Convention of Human Rights – a move which would infuriate the Liberal Democrats and push the Coalition to breaking point.

European judges have ruled that Qatada would not receive a fair trial in Jordan but Conservative MPs have suggested that the threat of Britain pulling out of the convention would persuade Strasbourg to back down.

The Prime Minister’s decision to put himself at the head of Government efforts to remove Qatada is high risk, since he will now be blamed if they fail.

Mrs May is expected to announce new developments in negotiations with Jordan over his deportation when she makes an emergency statement to the Commons today.

Ministers have been trying for a decade to send Qatada to Jordan, where he is accused of plotting a terrorist atrocity to coincide with the Millennium.

His removal was originally approved by the British courts, only to be halted by the European Court of Human Rights last year.

Judges in Strasbourg said he would not get a fair trial because some of the evidence used against him may have been obtained by torture. Controversially, Mrs May opted not to appeal against this verdict.

Instead, she and her ministers secured personal promises from the Jordanian authorities there would be no use of torture evidence, and began the deportation process again in the UK legal system.

But last November, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission said it was not satisfied with the assurances, and halted Qatada’s removal. The court said it must reflect the Strasbourg ruling.

That decision was last month upheld by the Appeal Court and yesterday the same court refused permission for the Home Secretary to challenge the ruling in the Supreme Court. The Government is to persist with its bid by applying directly to the Supreme Court for permission.


Romania and Bulgaria admit 35,000 nationals a year could come to the UK once border controls are abandoned

A Home Office spokesman said: ‘The Government remains committed to deporting this dangerous man and we continue to work with the Jordanians to address the outstanding legal issues preventing deportation.’

[Photo: Still smiling: Labour and Conservative ministers have been trying to deport Qatada for a decade but have failed]

In her statement to MPs today, Mrs May will announce new developments in negotiations with Jordan over deporting Qatada. Home Office minister James Brokenshire is understood to have visited the country to secure fresh assurances that the preacher will be treated fairly.

However, any new agreement would undoubtedly be subject to fresh appeals by Qatada.

At best, it would restart the legal merry-go-round, with the case going back through the British courts – and even returning to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

That could allow Qatada to remain in Britain for many years at taxpayers’ expense.

Qatada – who has been linked to a long list of international terrorists – is currently in Belmarsh high-security jail for allegedly breaching his immigration bail conditions. It is feared the longer the case drags on the less willing judges will be to insist Qatada remains in prison and the more likely it is that he will be allowed back out on to the streets.

Esher and Walton MP Dominic Raab, a former human rights lawyer, said: ‘The last government made a major mistake in not deporting Qatada in 2009, when the UK Law Lords gave the green light.

‘Qatada has been running rings around the British justice system ever since. This case shows we urgently need to overhaul the law on deportation, scrap the Human Rights Act and start standing up for British democracy rather than kow-towing to the European Court in Strasbourg.’

Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said after today’s decision was announced: ‘A year ago, Theresa May promised Abu Qatada would soon be on a plane.

‘Now it is clear her legal strategy has completely failed. The Home Secretary must tell us urgently what she is going to do now to get Abu Qatada deported or tried, and keep him off our streets.’


September 16 1993 - The Jordanian father of five claims asylum when he arrives in Britain on a forged passport.

June 1994 - He is allowed to stay in Britain.

March 1995 - Qatada issues a 'fatwa' justifying the killing of converts from Islam, their wives and children in Algeria.

May 1998 - He applies for indefinite leave to remain in Britain.

April 1999 - He is convicted in his absence on terror charges in Jordan and sentenced to life imprisonment.

October 1999 - The radical cleric speaks in London advocating the killing of Jews and praising attacks on Americans.

February 2001 - He is arrested by anti-terror police over involvement in a plot to bomb Strasbourg Christmas market. Officers find him in possession of £170,000 in cash, including £805 in an envelope marked 'For the mujahedin in Chechnya'.

December 2001 - Qatada becomes one of Britain's most wanted men after going on the run from his home in Acton, West London.

October 2002 - He is arrested by police in a council house in south London and detained in Belmarsh high-security jail.

March 2005 - He is freed on conditional bail and placed on a control order.

August 2005 - The preacher is arrested under immigration rules as the Government seeks to deport him to Jordan.

April 2008 - The Court of Appeal rules that deporting him would breach his human rights because evidence used against him in Jordan may have been obtained through torture.

May 2008 - Qatada is granted bail by the immigration tribunal but told he must stay inside for 22 hours a day.

June 2008 - He is released from Long Lartin jail in Worcestershire and moves in to a four bedroomed £800,000 home in West London.

November 2008 - He is rearrested after the Home Office tells an immigration hearing of fears he plans to abscond.

December 2008 - Qatada's bail is revoked by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) after hearing secret evidence that the risk of him absconding has increased.

February 18 2009 - In a landmark judgment, five Law Lords unanimously back the Government's policy of removing terror suspects from Britain on the basis of assurances from foreign governments. It is ruled he can be deported to Jordan to face terror charges.

February 19 2009 - Qatada is awarded £2,500 compensation by the European Court of Human Rights after the judges rule that his detention without trial in the UK under anti-terrorism powers breached his human rights.

January 2012 - European judges rule the firebrand cleric can be sent back to Jordan with diplomatic assurances but he cannot be deported while 'there remains a real risk that evidence obtained by torture will be used against him'.

February 6 2012 - SIAC rules he can be released on bail, despite posing a risk to national security.

February 9 2012 - David Cameron and King Abdullah of Jordan agree on the 'importance of finding an effective resolution' to his case, Downing Street says.

February 13 2012 - It emerges Qatada has been released on bail from Long Lartin prison.

April 17 2012 - The cleric is arrested as the Government prepares to deport him to Jordan.

April 18 2012 - Abu Qatada lodges an appeal - potentially delaying his deportation by months.

March 6 2013 - He is returned to jail over fears the terror suspect was trying to communicate with associates, in breach of bail conditions.

March 27 2013 - Court of Appeal admits hate preacher is 'very dangerous' but rules sending him to face a terror trial in Jordan would not be fair.

April 17 2013 - Home Office says it will take its battle to the Supreme Court.


Spin, spin and more spin - there is no way under the sun that the political elite will permit a withdrawal of any sort from Human Rights (as defined by EU). Just catching a few headlines to make us plebs think they actually care.

Less talk and more action is required. If Cameron is considering 'controversial' options, why not go the whole hog and have May announce today that Qatada is on a plane en route to Jordan and have done with it. Then we should withdraw from the Convention permanently, repeal the Human Rights Act and start making decisions for ourselves on who comes to our country and who gets kicked out. As for Yvette Cooper-Balls wittering on about how badly this has been handled, give me strength - it was your bunch of clowns that allowed this situation to arise in the first place so kindly shut up and keep your head down.


He's finished without the Lib/Dums and he knows it. Camoron is a coward. He won't dare risk his coalition buddies livelihoods by calling an election. They will hang on for dear life until the last possible moment. The big three are history, VOTE UKIP!

Mr Cameron please do not consider withdrawal from this odious law but PERMANTLY withdraw, considering it will not solve this problem just do it for goodness sake if not Britain's , and stop the benefits we hand out to this man and his family , why are they considered to be entitled to thousands of pounds of our money I should like to know.. .

Well on with it don't just talk about it this Country is becoming a laughing stock !

Where are the SAS when you need them?

Excuse me, but he originally arrivd in Britain on a FORGED passport - why was he then given the right to settle???

He entered the UK illegally. Ignore the court and send him back and tell him he can fight his case from Jordan.

He has the same rights as anyone else so why should he be kicked out? He'd be tortured and that's a violation of his human rights.

This witch hunt is getting beyond a joke now. He is harmless, never harmed anyone. Just leave him alone and let him get on with life.

Well in Abu son. Legend.


The British press favourite bogeyman. He has been victimised and I am glad he won.

What has been convicted of in a court of law? Nothing

"We are the laughing stock of the world." Yes I agree with you where else in the World do we have so many of the population advocating breaking the law of the land to turn someone out who hasn't broken the law.

"Useless lot - vote UKIP - he needs putting on a plane." Why? Are you saying Ukip will break the law? We need to get rid of him but voting Ukip is not going to do that.

For those of you who think that tearing up the human rights act and/or leaving Europe would mean this wouldn't have happened are wrong. Stop listening to what the press tell you and educate yourself. International law would not have permitted it either and that's not something you can simply "tear up" or "leave".



"Hungarian" Kike Adler is the number one talk radio host in Canada, giving the hoi polloi their talking points.

"Canadian" Talk: Kike talks to Kike about Kike convention and how the Kike-run Jewnited States doesn't support poor little Kikestan enough:


You can skip to about 1:20 in this video, unless you want to see MLK and Gandhi getting slobbered over

Note to videomakers: It's a waste of time to complain to complain to The Kike's NBC, and to complain about The Kike's SNL, unless you NAME AND TRASH THE KIKE.

You should be glad The Kike antichrist has revealed itself to more believers.




The main result of the recent terrorist activities in Boston and Quebec-Ontario -- the most significant and long-lasting consequence -- will be an increase in Muslim immigration.

At the RCMP/OPP press conference announcing the arrests of Chiheb Esseghaier and Raed Jaser, "Muslim Community Leaders" were key speakers, given star-billing by the cops and the media.

Much media coverage was given over to the importance of fighting "Islamophobia" (a kike concept), and of remembering that the arrests were facilitated by the good Muslims, who informed the authorities.

Christie Blatchford, in The National Post:

While NDP leader Thomas Mulcair and Prime Minister Stephen Harper Tuesday took a moment to thank the Muslim community — in particular, an anonymous imam from Toronto — for their role in foiling the train plot, Postmedia sources say that Operation Smooth, as the RCMP called the project, was already well underway by the time the imam called police over his concern about an extremist.

This is not to diminish the action of the whistle-blowing imam, who was also praised later in the day by Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, but it does illustrate a certain Canadian desire for comfort in an otherwise unsettling story.


Mr. Jaser was standing in the prisoner’s dock. He appeared to nod at one young man, perhaps a brother.

The mostly inaudible justice of the peace asked if he understood her instructions, chiefly that he was remanded to May 23, and that he must not communicate with Mr. Esseghaier except through his lawyer.

“It’s very clear,” Mr. Jaser replied, and that was pretty much that.

Mr. Jaser’s father, Mohammed, his mother, and assorted other relatives, including two women clad in black head-to-toe niqabs, chatted for a while, then left, trailed by a vast caravan of cameras and reporters.

Mr. Jaser’s lawyer, John Norris, later emerged on the steps of the courthouse to say the usual things: His client would defend the allegations vigorously; though the police had attempted to “demonize” the Jasers by saying they aren’t Canadian citizens, the family was well-settled in Canada, permanent residents.

Kike NatPost High Muz Values


Communist Prime Minister Pierre TrudeaU, discussing his implementation of the War Measures Act, the suspension of habeus corpus, and the authorization of mass arrests of suspect individuals and groups, and of searches without warrents:

Tim Ralfe, CBC: …what you're talking about to me is choices, and my choice is to live in a society that is free and democratic, which means that you don't have people with guns running around in it.

Pierre Trudeau: Correct.

Ralfe: And one of the things I have to give up for that choice is the fact that people like you may be kidnapped.

Trudeau: Sure, but this isn't my choice, obviously. You know, I think it is more important to get rid of those who are committing violence against the total society and those who are trying to run the government through a parallel power by establishing their authority by kidnapping and blackmail. And I think it is our duty as a government to protect government officials and important people in our society against being used as tools in this blackmail. Now, you don't agree to this but I am sure that once again with hindsight, you would probably have found it preferable if Mr. Cross and Mr. Laporte had been protected from kidnapping, which they weren't because these steps we're taking now weren't taken. But even with your hindsight I don't see how you can deny that.

Ralfe: No, I still go back to the choice that you have to make in the kind of society that you live in.

Trudeau: Yes, well there are a lot of bleeding hearts around who just don't like to see people with helmets and guns. All I can say is, go on and bleed, but it is more important to keep law and order in this society than to be worried about weak-kneed people who don't like the looks of a soldier's helmet.

Ralfe: At any cost? How far would you go with that? How far would you extend that?

Trudeau: Well, just watch me.

Ralfe: At reducing civil liberties? To that extent?

Trudeau: To what extent?

Ralfe: Well, if you extend this and you say, ok, you're going to do anything to protect them, does this include wire-tapping, reducing other civil liberties in some way?

Trudeau: Yes, I think the society must take every means at its disposal to defend itself against the emergence of a parallel power which defies the elected power in this country and I think that goes to any distance. So long as there is a power in here which is challenging the elected representative of the people I think that power must be stopped and I think it's only, I repeat, weak-kneed bleeding hearts who are afraid to take these measures.

Would-be Communist Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's response to the terrorist bombings in Boston:

"Over the coming days it will be necessary to look at root causes. We don't know if it was terrorism, or a single crazy, or a domestic issue or a foreign issue — all those questions. But there is no question that this happened because of someone who feels completely excluded, someone who feels completely at war with innocence, at war with society. It is important not to marginalize people even further who already feel like they are enemies of society rather than people who have hope for the future."

$10,000,000 worth of digging for Root Causes:

Kike Canada Root Causes Kanishka




Search form
Latest Journals
Latest comments
Monthly archive
Friend Request Form

Want to be friends with this user.