Eurabia: Our liking for submission

by Anders Bruun Laursen

As you know Islam means submission. This submission-mania has befallen our politicians and media – under the name of “appeasement”, the effect being dictatorial appeasement of the indigenous peoples by all means and a futile attempt to purchase the loyalty of the Muslim immigrants. As history shows appeasement, alias cowardly buying our lives at the cost of our souls, always leads to a submission so intolerable that an unnecessary, bloody war ensues:

To show you our submissiveness I shall now repeat 

Some of our elected leaders’ statements:.                                         

Former Prime Minister, Tony Blair :      

1 a. “The most remarkable thing about reading the Koran – in so far as it can be truly translated from the original Arabic – is to understand how progressive it is. http://surl.se/crcq , http://surl.se/eeyp  pp. 12-13. “I speak with great diffidence and humility as a member of another faith. I am not qualified to make any judgements. But as an outsider, the Koran strikes me as a reforming book, trying to return Judaism and Christianity to their origins, rather as reformers attempted with the Christian Church centuries later. It is inclusive. It extols science and knowledge and abhors superstition. It is practical and way ahead of its time in attitudes to marriage, women and governance,” he said. He added that under the guidance of the Qur’an, the spread of Islam and its dominance over previously Christian or pagan lands was “breathtaking”. “Over centuries it founded an Empire, leading the world in discovery, art and culture. We look back to the early Middle Ages, the standard bearers of tolerance at that time were far more likely to be found in Muslim lands than in Christian,” he declared.

1 b. “A Muslim could one day be Prime Minister” (of the UK), Tony Blair said on Dec. 8, 2006. The Premier also said he would not mind if any of his children wanted to marry a Muslim. Well, the Blair family is catholic- more or less. Marrying into a Muslim family means unconditional submission to Muhammad´s rules, i.e. abandoning one´s Christian faith, even an obligation to fight Christians!! A Muslim is not allowed to marry or make friends with an infidel (Quran sure 2:221, 3:28, 3:118, 4: 89, 5:51). Allah has no son (sura 4:171) and thus cannot be the father of Jesus Christ. Allah calls for Muslims to curse infidels (sura 3:61). Allah /Muhammad even demands Muslims to “cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority (sura 3:151, 8:60). Their abode will be the Fire”. “How can there be a league, before Allah and His Messenger, with the Pagans, except those with whom ye made a treaty near the sacred Mosque?” (sura 9:7). Even “fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)” (sura 9:5). What Tony Blair wishes his children to do is 1. to trample on the Christian cross. And 2. his daughter (if he has one) to become the property of a man, who has the obligation to castigate her ( sura 4:34) and “If any of your women are guilty of lewdness …….., confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way (sura 4:15).

I do not believe, that Tony Blair really would wish this for his children. So his statements should rather be seen  as submission : a. public hypocrisy to please the Muslims or/and  2. an expression of a disastrous ignorance of our leaders – leading to our disaster.
Tony Blair said the UK were a better society now than 30 years ago, that offensive remarks and stupid stereotypes were driven out of everyday conversation. Mr Blair pleased Muslims members of his audience by referring to extremists as a “fringe element” http://surl.se/eeyq  .                                                            

2. UK-secretary of State, Margaret Beckett (On July 7, 2006 in the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten): “Our relationship today with the Islamic world, which also shares our common ideals, has grown still deeper since the London bombs.”

3. Danish Foreign Minister (FM) , Moeller – according to Danish professor Bent Jensen, Jyllands-Posten , Nov. 26, 2005 : “The Christian civilization is under pressure. However FM not being for a religious war in the 21. century, he wants to pay the Arabs off through a special appropriation of about 100 million kroner for the Arab countries in the finance budget. “It is Europe´s task to foster tolerance and understanding and to tell the Muslims that they have no right to demand us to live as they want. We shall not try to convert them, but we shall be allowed to be left alone from their attempts to convert us. “The next time we shall be the losers: Then we old men shall have to stand up against an overwhelming crowd of Muslims!”
Such a policy is clearly defeatistic.           

4. Former Swedish Minister Jens Orback: “We must be open and tolerant to Islam and Muslims because when we become a minority, they will be so to us.” http://surl.se/eeys

Now, see the excuses of our politicians for drowning our countries in a continuous surge of Muslim immigration

What makes our politicians so submissive on our behalf? Fear? Of  whom? Bribery? Islam is never more dangerous than our politicians allow it to be. Who believes in our politicians´ usual excuses for the Muslim mass-immigration? a. Lack of labour: in Denmark the employment rate among non-Western immigrants is 46% as compared with 77% among Danes.b. Lack of people to nurse us as we grow old: Muslim women deliberately avoid nursing  due to religious ban to even look at male genitals. c. We despearately need a larger common market in order to compete with the USA, China etc. The Muslim countries are – and will remain – impoverished bad buyers and producers and costly for us due to Islam, which suppresses any development, and due to unhampered baby-boom in these populations. D. Cultural enrichment: We have only seen an enriched criminality due to the Muslim mass immigration. What we shall see is the destruction of Western way of life. E. The Arabs could boycot our oil supplies – as in 1973. Well – in 1973 Sheik Yamani, the Saudi Oil Minister, did his utmost to prevent oil shortage in the West. It was the Bilderbergers lead by Henry Kissinger, who wanted a qudrupling of oil prices (Andreas von Rétyi, “Bilderberger”, Kopp, Rottenburg 2006 ). I guess that the Arab oil princes would suffer more than we in an oil boycot, as they would miss our money to feed their hungry masses. Which would soon lead to revolution!                                                                                                                          

But Mr. Tony Blairs statements (1. a and b.) do indeed indicate another and much more likely reason:

Islam protecting us infidels, the wrongly romanced Golden Andalusia (711-1492 A.D.) being seen as the society model of the 21. century by the globalists/New World Order

(mentioned 5 times by Pres. Bush sen. 1990-1991 http://surl.se/eeyt ) for their dictatorial one-world state governed by a small clique of bankers and their followers in their Euromediterranean/Eurabian wonderland http://surl.se/eeyy . Although according to Bat Ye´or Golden Andalusia was the longest nightmare for non-muslims in history.
In the wake of the “Muhammad-crisis” in 2006, as Danish flags and Danish embassies were being burnt by furious Muslim crowds in the Middle East and North Africa  Danish industrialists appeared on TV, blubberingly demanding the Danish government to react and excuse for the Muhammad-cartoons: Danish industry were about to lose about poor 2 billion kroner a year because of a Muslim boycot! Then 3 hours later Bill Clinton expressed his sympathy with the poor , violated Muslims on TV and told Denmark to be ashamed of itself. Wherupon the Danish Prime Minister appeared on TV about 3 hours after that – deeply shaken. For the first time, he now personally dissociated himself from the cartoons and the unconditional freedom of expression under responsibility to court secured by our Constitution. One hour later the newspaper, which had published the cartoons, apologized to the Muslims for having violated their feelings! And this although on the same morning in its leader the newspaper had declined any apology whatsoever to the Muslims for the cartoons!

                                                
Why did Bill Clinton interfere ? On September 11, 2001, the Melbourne Age reported on former President Bill Clinton’s speech to an Australian confab: “The [former] president believes the world will be a better place if all borders are eliminated – from a trade perspective, from the viewpoint of economic development and in welcoming [the free movement of] people from other cultures and countries,” Mr. Hogan said. Mr. Clinton showed an understanding of the political problems Australia faced, but said he supported the ultimate wisdom of a borderless world for people and for trade. I could refer to many similar statements by Mr. Clinton´s highly influential chums. Here is just one more: “Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” –David Rockefeller, MEMOIRS, page 405  http://surl.se/efzd . Islam with its bid for world domination is simply the ram of the globalists to batter the obstacles – the national state and Christianity – to their merging goal. These rich and influential people despise democracy – and like a society where the rich Sheikhs have a good time.

Is the Muslim mass immigration a gain for us? Or a tribute to the Muslims?

In Sweden in 1999, 14% of the GNP was spent on immigrants – as compared with 7% in 1990 . Sweden used 267 billion kroner a year on immigration in 1999 – only stating 7 billions in the official budget! http://surl.se/eezr .This squandering was financed by increasing the rate of taxation from 48 to 54%, among other things.                                

The Danish social state is severely threatened, because of costs amounting to a huge part of the state budget , which is 600 billion kroner a year (2007). In 2001 Denmark´s expenditures for immigrants – nearly exclusively for the 11% Muslim immigrants and naturalized Muslims http://surl.se/eltr – were 150 billion kroner http://surl.se/eezs or about 40 % of the Danish wellfare expenditures. However, only 11 billions appeared on the official state budget!! In both EU-countries hospitals, patients, children, old people, schools etc. are at a loss, having their budgets cut every year – due to increasing immigrant-costs. In return for our tributes to Islam we receive ever increasing violence and the contempt of the Muslims we wish to help in our “goodness”. And the sharia is being peacemeal introduced, the schools of Copenhagen already nearly exclusively serving halal-food – an all Danish poultry being blessed in the name of “Allah – the Greatest”!
This false belief in buying ones freedom is not new, as shown in this poem by Rudyard Kipling – of as much current interest as ever before. Although being a Dane I agree with Kipling:

Dane-geld ( the predecessor of present-day Muslim-geld)
It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
To call upon a neighbour and to say:–
“We invaded You last night–we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless You pay us cash to go away.

And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
and the people who ask for it explain
That You have only to pay them the Dane-geld
And then You will get rid of the Dane!

It is allways a temptation for a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say:–
“Though we know we should defeat You,
we have not the time to meet You
We will therefor pay You cash to go away.”

And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we have proved it again and again,That if once You have paid him the dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.

It is wrong to put temtation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when You are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find a better policy to say:–

!We never pay ANY-ONE Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost:
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that pays it is lost!!”