British academic and journalist Douglas Murray schools pro-immigration activists on immigration – YouTube

I have to confess, I had not even heard of Douglas Murray, that I can recall, until literally a few days ago. But in my opinion, he’s brilliant. Very, very well said, Sir!

Heck, you want to talk colonialism? It’s not just the Ottoman Empire – although he is completely right to point to them as a prime example. It’s the whole sweep of Islam across the Middle East, North Africa, and southern Europe, including the Iberian Peninsula in the 7th and early 8th centuries, and far beyond later on, all the way to India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines… If that’s not colonialism, I don’t know what is!

I like what one Indian commentator had to say on the subject (ellipses are in the original):

Bravo. As an Indian, I’ve noticed everyone loves to blame the British, while conveniently forgetting Muslims (Turkish mainly) that have destroyed and robbed India. The British used India as a business to generate their wealth and in turn ended up building functional infrastructures still in use.

What the Muslims did was erect f_cking monuments of oppression… and mosques over desecrated Temples and completely eradicate our history in many places. British only tried to enslave us while empowering some locals.. but Muslims not only enslaved us but killed us and very strongly tried to change our identities. British came here and learnt from India.. but Muslims came and robbed our knowledge to claim it as their own and burnt the rest.

People need to stop thinking every f_cking thing against Muslims is Islamophobia…. In the new age, you are able to stand freely against colonialism / anything else really when it comes to the “West” … but if it were still Islamic, you’d be silenced swiftly like an animal (as the Muslims boast in their taunts towards free speech activists).

Indeed. The double-standard is strong in the Left! Especially ironic, since they’d be among the first against the wall, tossed from tall buildings, or beheaded, if Islam ever actually did come to power in the West…

And yes, the “alt-right” is correct: as promoted and practiced by many (most) Left-wing activists today, “diversity” and “multi-culturalism” are indeed code words for being anti-white, anti-European – for rejecting and seeking to overthrow the West, both culturally and demographically. That may not be a popular view in many quarters, but it is a fact, and readily apparent if you’re paying attention.

Death of Europe: Europeans are losing the place they call home, says Douglas Murray | Express.co.uk

Is our continent on a suicide mission?

Source: Death of Europe: Europeans are losing the place they call home, says Douglas Murray | Express Comment | Comment | Express.co.uk

More from Douglas Murray on the crisis facing Europe:

Over the years of the recent migration crisis I have been travelling across Europe from the most remote southern islands of Italy to the north of Sweden, from the islands of Greece to the suburbs of France.

I have travelled to the places where migrants continue to land and the places where they keep ending up. Everywhere I have gone I have come to the same conclusion: our continent is in the process of self-murder.

Amid the day-to-day distraction of life and politics, it is easy to forget this biggest event of our time. All pale into insignificance besides the story of the loss by Europeans of the only place we had to call home…

Of course it is possible when standing in a migrant camp in one of these places or speaking to the people who arrive – as I have done many times – to think that perhaps our continent can cope with this flow.

From these far-flung outposts a few thousand people arriving every single day and then being shipped or flown up on to the mainland of Europe can seem a manageable prospect. In fact it spells a continent’s catastrophe.

Europe, PLEASE wake up, before it is too late!!!

Douglas Murray | Crucial message to Europeans – YouTube

It is hard for me to express how much wisdom, common sense, and just plain good this message contains. Unfortunately, I fear that the people who most need to hear it will reject it out of hand. But that does not change the truth of what he is saying!

Among his many cogent points:

“It seems to me absolutely legitimate that the peoples of Europe should be able to have a place they call home, and that that place should not be taken away from them. Because after all, we don’t have another choice… We don’t have another deal on the side, here. This is our home. And so we should think very, very deeply before giving that home up to the entire world.”

Amen. Amen, and amen!

A traditional Englishman speaks out on immigration

Source: Democracy NEEDS Borders 2 – Taking Back Control

“We were never asked!”

Percentage of Europeans Who Are Willing To Fight A War For Their Country – Brilliant Maps

The map above shows the percentage of residents in various European countries who are willing to fight and go to war for their country.

Source: Percentage of Europeans Who Are Willing To Fight A War For Their Country – Brilliant Maps

I am generally a very peaceful person. It takes a good bit to move me to anger, and more yet to move me to violence. In particular, I am willing to shrug off, for the sake of peace and tranquility, many offenses against me, personally – as my dear late mother used to say, “consider the source.” Most offenders are not worth my time and effort!

That is not to say that I am merely passive, however, or that I cannot be provoked:

But if I am relatively forgiving of offenses directed toward me, I am less sanguine with respect to assaults directed toward people I love, care for, or who are under my protection. I am also much quicker to take offense to attacks on ideals I believe in, and places I value.

Sadly, that is not a viewpoint which seems to be shared by many Europeans. If this study, based on a 2015 WIN/Gallup International global survey, is accurate, it seems that most citizens of most European countries do not care enough about their own nations, people, and the history, heritage, and traditions they share to be willing to fight to preserve them.

Is it any wonder that outside invaders, from Islamic jihadists to economic opportunists, are leaping to take advantage of this weakness? Here is the breakdown, by percentage and country, from the largest number of willing defenders to the least. I find it not only sobering, but depressing, disillusioning, and downright scary for the future of Europe, and of Western civilization.

  • 74% – Finland (“Hakkaa Päälle!“)
  • 73% – Turkey
  • 62% – Ukraine
  • 59% – Russia
  • 58% – Kosovo
  • 55% – Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • 55% – Sweden
  • 54% – Greece
  • 47% – Poland
  • 46% – Serbia
  • 41% – Latvia
  • 39% – Switzerland
  • 38% – Ireland
  • 38% – Macedonia
  • 38% – Romania
  • 37% – Denmark
  • 29% – France
  • 28% – Portugal
  • 27% – United Kingdom
  • 26% – Iceland
  • 25% – Bulgaria
  • 23% – Czech Republic
  • 21% – Austria
  • 21% – Spain
  • 20% – Italy
  • 19% – Belgium
  • 18% – Germany
  • 15% – The Netherlands

This bodes not well for the future, to put it mildly!

If there is any consolation, it is in the knowledge that, by some estimates, as little as 10% of the population of the American colonies was passionate about independence, prior to the Revolutionary War. More came on board later, but probably never more than 30% of the population was passionate about liberty and independence. Large numbers are not always what is needed; commitment is what is needed. But the figures are still, as I say, extremely sobering…

Note: “Hakkaa Päälle!” – my comment, it was not in the original list – translates roughly to “Hack them down!” or “Cut them down!” God bless the Finns.

Madness in the Med: how charity rescue boats exacerbate the refugee crisis | The Spectator

Source: Madness in the Med: how charity rescue boats exacerbate the refugee crisis | The Spectator

While this basically is a fair-minded, balanced, and reasonable article, I have to say that referring to the situation in (and outside) Europe as a “refugee crisis” is dangerously erroneous and misleading. As the article itself points out:

“The debate about migrant crossings tends to be held in the context of people fleeing from wars in Syria and Libya. Yet according to Eurostat, the EU’s statistical arm, of the 46,995 migrant arrivals in Italy in the first four months of this year, only 635 were Syrians and 170 were Libyans. By contrast, 10,000 came from Nigeria, 4,135 from Bangladesh, 3,865 from the Gambia, 3,625 from Pakistan and 3,460 from Senegal. None of these countries can be said to be consumed by civil war, and even if some individuals had reason to claim asylum, international law dictates that they should claim it in the first ‘safe’ country they reach — which in every case would be before crossing the sea to Italy.”

The article further points out that there is “obvious and growing evidence that very few of the arriving migrants can honestly be called refugees — unless you widen that definition to include anyone who lives in Africa, on the basis that its standards of living and respect for human rights are universally lower than in western Europe.”

So, then, everyone living in Africa has a “right” to emigrate to European or other developed countries? I think not!

This is not a refugee crisis, it is a migration crisis; these are economic refugees, seeking to better their situation in an imagined “El Dorado” (as one commentator has put it) in Europe, where everything from lodging to women is free and easily available. And we have already seen how well these immigrants “blend in” to European culture and society… or not.

To quote the article again, “the vast majority of migrants from Libya are young men” – a fact which is readily apparent from a glance at any of the many pictures which have been taken of them. [Note: Libya is the staging area, most are from sub-Saharan Africa, or from the Indian subcontinent, as the numbers quoted above make clear.] If these are “refugees,” where are the women and children? These men are either cowards – if they are indeed fleeing violence, leaving their families behind – or, in most cases, they are not refugees at all. In either case, they should not be allowed in Europe.

In fact, if this is allowed to continue, there will be no Europe! One action that would greatly help to alleviate the situation would be banning the operation of NGO (“charity”) boats as ferries to pick up migrants and transport them across the Mediterranean. If that is not possible, under international law, then at least deny them access to European ports. To quote the article again:

“These charities, and others operating ships in the Mediterranean, of course claim to be saving lives. But what they are really doing is colluding — either intentionally or not — in a people-trafficking operation. If charities and NGOs stopped providing a pick-up service a few miles off Libya, and if Italy started returning migrants to the North African countries whence they came, the smugglers’ boats would not put to sea.”

Indeed. And the sooner this happens, the better.

I have said it before, I will say it again: Europe, wake up!

Migrant crisis – EU’s top court rules in favour of Dublin Agreement | Politics | News | Express.co.uk

EUROPE’S top court this morning threw a spanner in the works of Brussels attempts to resolve the migrant crisis by ruling that member states have the power to deport asylum seekers back to the first EU country they entered.

Source: Migrant crisis – EU’s top court rules in favour of Dublin Agreement | Politics | News | Express.co.uk

In an eagerly awaited ruling judges at the ECJ confirmed that Austria and Slovenia can send migrants back to Croatia to have their asylum cases determined there instead. 

I am sorry for Croatia, which I’m sure is feeling overwhelmed – ditto Italy and Greece – but this is a victory for both national sovereignty and for the preservation of Europe’s cultural and historical integrity, as well as for Austria.

My question is, why are “hundreds of thousands” of migrants being allowed into Europe at all? They have to come from somewhere – that is, have ingress points – and they have to be let in by someone. If you don’t let them in, in the first place, you don’t have to decide their status! And if it’s “the law” that you have to let them in, then “the law” needs to be changed.

I am opposed in principle to this absurd and very recent notion that any nation is under obligation to accept anyone, regardless of circumstances, within their borders. If they choose to do so, on humanitarian grounds, that’s their choice; but trying to legally require it? Ridiculous, and dangerous.