Racism. A One-way Street in the EU.

The following text is taken directly from the pages of the EU parliament webside’s press service report, dated 20-03-2007.

Since the German EU Presidency committed itself in January to putting the fight against racism throughout Europe back on the political agenda, MEPs have been working to find common ground on the future framework decision to combat racism and xenophobia, on which negotiations have been stalled in Council since 2005. The latest state of play was the subject of a public hearing in Parliament on Monday, with the issue of holocaust denial featuring prominently.

“Unfortunately, the 2006 report of the EU Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia in Vienna shows that the number of racist acts increased again last year by between 20 and 45 per cent depending on the Member State,” said Parliament’s rapporteur Martine Roure as she opened the hearing. “These alarming figures show the urgency of achieving a minimum harmonisation in Europe, to include a common definition of racist and xenophobic behaviour to be subject to criminal penalties which are effective, proportionate and have a deterrent effect.” Commenting on the text currently under discussion in Council, she said “the current balance of the text, which specifies charges, allows certain well defined derogations and provides for judicial cooperation should be preserved.”
[...]
“Unfortunately, the 2006 report of the EU Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia in Vienna shows that the number of racist acts increased again last year by between 20 and 45 per cent depending on the Member State,” said Parliament’s rapporteur Martine Roure as she opened the hearing. “These alarming figures show the urgency of achieving a minimum harmonisation in Europe, to include a common definition of racist and xenophobic behaviour to be subject to criminal penalties which are effective, proportionate and have a deterrent effect.” Commenting on the text currently under discussion in Council, she said “the current balance of the text, which specifies charges, allows certain well defined derogations and provides for judicial cooperation should be preserved.”

Obviously the racism question is getting some attention, but in which direction? The traffic appears to be all one-way. The general feeling one gets, is that it is only acts of racism perpetrated by indigenous European citizens that are of any importance. What of racism being directed at indigenous europeans? This is basically ignored by the EU and apparently does not exist. The article goes on to describe the discussion caused by the publishing of a booklet by Polish-born Maciej Giertych, a free MEP, which is basically denying the Holocaust. The EU is up in arms:

Referring to the framework decision, Ms Roure spoke of the “necessity of including negationism.” She said that she understood the need to respect each Member State’s history and traditions, but “recent events, including in our own institution with Maciej Giertych’s publication suggesting that the Third Reich did no more than shut Jews into the ghettos they had themselves created, show that we must redouble our efforts to ban this type of historical minimisation which is a veiled form of anti-Semitism.” It would be, however, for each Member State to decide how to punish such acts.

Stavros Lambrinidis (PES, EL) said, on the other hand, that “freedom of speech is most important to be protected. There is no question that the Nazi genocide started with words and incitement to hatred but I wonder if sending some people to jail for their words would have saved us from the holocaust or rather would have transformed them into heroes. There should be a clear line to define what should be punished. In democracy, freedom of speech should always be protected, in any circumstances. I come from a country which suffered a dictatorship and I consider it very dangerous to allow anybody to judge what can be said and what cannot”.

Isil Gachet (Council of Europe) said that freedom of expression and banning racist speeches are not in contradiction and that there is a way of making them compatible. She said that article 10 of the European convention on Human Rights guarantees freedom of speech but it also defines limits, which include racist speeches and incitation of hatred or intolerance.

While I have no doubt that Maciej Giertych is on the wrong course and that those 6.5 million people didn’t choose their awful fate, the interesting thing is the invocation of the 10th article of the European Convention on Human rights.
Article 10 concerns itself with freedom of speech. Reading it makes it very clear, that there is no such thing as freedom of speech, as more text is dedicated to denying you that right, than to allowing it.

ARTICLE 10

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

If the EU Parliament is serious about making such claims as denying the holocaust a racist crime, then why are we not exposing and condemning the racism inferred by Islam? More antisemitic than that would be hard to find. Also the racism directed against Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Zoroastroans, in fact every religion in the world other than Islam itself?
And why are we not calling it a racist crime when some Imam, somewhere, calls for “Death to America”, or Israel or Denmark or “those that insult Islam”, whoever they may be?
Why are they not being rounded up and tried for racist crimes?
Perhaps the next time a european girl is raped by a muslim (that would be today, at some point), we should push to get it tried as a race-hate crime? Maybe that would set the ball rolling.

Links:
EU press service article.
European Convention on Human rights.

Much Appreciated Feedback…

We received the following comment to our post “Newest blog on the block”.

Quote:

…and as always, the visitors who do not agree with the opinions of a controversial blog will look for contact information. And very likely find the name of the theme designer in the bottom, resulting in him getting angry e-mails that he honestly does not deserve. So to make it clear from the start: If you have comments about the content of this blog, send it to the blog owner. Not to the theme designer, since he is not in any way affiliated with this blog (or any other wordpress.com blog).

Which may be very true. Therefore, our readers are advised either to comment directly under the relevant posting or to contact us via the links provided on the site. Unfortunately WordPress does not allow us to modify the blog template. If they did, then we would remove the information at the very bottom of this blog. The theme designer has nothing to do with the content of this blog, nor indeed, to our knowledge at least, with SIOE.

Our thanks to “Mahmet” for bringing this to our attention.

---

Update:The site has been updated. Please read the FEEDBACK page in the upper menu and the pointer in the left sidebar, “Comments and Feedback”.

The Berlin Declaration:

The Berlin Declaration. Read it and weep.

Europe was for centuries an Idea, a hope for freedom and understanding. This hope has been fulfilled. European unity has enabled us to live in peace and prosperity. It has created a community and overcome differences. Every member has helped to unite Europe and to strengthen democracy, the rule of law. We have to thank the love of freedom of the people of central and eastern Europe that Europe’s unnatural divisions are today finally overcome. With European unity, we have learned the lessons from our bloody conflicts and painful history. We live today together in a way that was never previously possible. We citizens of the European Union are united in our good fortune.

Section 1

In the European Union we realise our common ideals: for us the individual is central. His dignity is inviolable. His rights are inalienable. Women and men have equal rights. We strive for peace and freedom, for democracy and the rule of law, for mutual respect and responsibility, for prosperity and security, for tolerance and participation, justice and solidarity. We live and function together in the European Union in a unique way. This expresses itself in the democratic co-operation of member states and European institutions. The European Union is based on equal rights and solidarity. That is how we make possible a fair balance of interests between the member states. We uphold in the European Union the individuality and the diverse traditions of its members. The open frontiers and the lively diversity of languages, cultures and regions enrich us. Many goals cannot be achieved independently but only through common action. The European Union, the member states and their regions and local communities share these tasks.

Section 2

We face great challenges which cannot be confined to national frontiers. The European Union is our answer to them. Only together can we preserve our European social model in the future to the benefit of all citizens in the European Union. This European model unites economic success and social responsibility. The common market and the euro make us strong.

That is how we can shape the increasing worldwide interdependency of the economy and ever expanding competition on international markets according to our values. Europe’s wealth lies in the knowledge and abilities of its people; this is the key to growth, employment and social cohesion. We will jointly fight terrorism and organised crime. We will also defend our freedom and civil rights against their enemies. Racism and xenophobia must never again be given their chance. We will act to ensure that conflicts in the world are solved peacefully and that people do not become victims of war, terrorism or violence.

The European Union will promote freedom and development in the world. We want to push back poverty, hunger and disease. In doing so, we will continue to play a leading role. In energy policy and protection of the climate we want to go forward together and make our contribution to heading off the global threat of climate change.

Section 3

The European Union will continue to live in the future on the basis of its openness and the will of its members to strengthen together the inner development of the European Union. The European Union will continue to promote democracy, stability and prosperity beyond its frontiers. European unity has made reality out of a dream nurtured by earlier generations. Our history warns us that we have to protect this good fortune for future generations. We must continue to renew and update the political shape of Europe. That is why, 50 years after the signing of the Treaties of Rome, we are today united in the goal of achieving a renewed common foundation for the European Union before the elections to the European Parliament in 2009.

Because we know: Europe is our common future.

Then please, answer us this:

“We will also defend our freedom and civil rights against their enemies.”
How? By eradicating our rights to freedom of speech and that of the press? By allowing only selected groups to demonstrate while denying others?

“Racism and xenophobia must never again be given their chance.”
Then why have they not addressed the racism that exists in the muslim community? The belief that they are superior to us? The belief that all other than muslims are secondary? That Islam is the only way?
Until they do that, they are not representing us.

“The European Union will continue to promote democracy”.
How? By admitting the enemies of democracy into our midst?

Finally: The opening statement…
“Europe was for centuries an idea, a hope for freedom and understanding. This hope has been fulfilled.”
And having achieved that, we are now allowing it to be destroyed from within by forces from without.

Actions speak far louder than words. Talk and declarations are cheap.

Start Fighting Back.

We are all aware of the need to stop the Islamisation of our various lands. We all know, that the politicians of our time are not going to help us. If they were, they would have done so by now and stopped the desecration of our right to freedom of speech. They would not give in to the pressure from hordes of screaming muslims demanding the beheading of various editors, politicians and writers, nor would they continue the constant apologising for nothing more than trivia.

The question is, how do we fight back? What can we do?

Statistically, and thereby democratically, we are in a stronger position. All we need to do is get organized. No nation in Europe is, as yet, outnumbered by its immigrant population. Which means that the indigenous population is still the larger and more dominant. Therefore we have to use that numerical advantage as best we can, while we still have it.

That alone is our single most effective weapon. How are we to use it?

Our rights are being eroded only because we allow it to happen. We do not complain loudly enough. This has to change. We have to make more noise. We especially have to make more noise than that which the muslim communities in our own countries do.
We must collectively lobby our politicians for active resistance. Every time the muslims begin demanding this or that, simply because of their superstition religion, we must lobby harder for that change not to take place. If they have 5 organisations, we must have 10. If they demonstrate, so must we, twice for their once. We can bombard the do-nothing politicians with e-mail and post. Learn your MP’s address and memorise it. Put them on your mailing list. Encourage others to do the same. Write to these politicians, that you think things to be unaccceptable and demand a response. Start petitioning. Organize the resistance. Start the groups and join whatever local national organisations that exist already. Form new chapters. Increase the numbers.
Only by active lobbying can we make a difference. Writing amongst ourselves is narcissistic and basically only preaching to the choir. We need to get the choir out of the church and on to the street. We are that choir. We ourselves need to get involved. No one else is going to do this for us. And unless we begin to make a very loud and very public noise, the politicians in Europe will slumber peacefully on, oblivious to our opinions and laughing all the way to the bank.
We are their masters. They are elected to serve us. We must tell them what we want. If we do that, loudly, clearly, legally, peacefully and collectively, they have no alternative but to supply it.

We have less than six months left to prepare to put our views forward by demonstration in Brusssels on the 11th of September. I suggest we all get busy.
Let’s start fighting back.

Let’s Take it to Brussels!

Demonstration outside the European Parliament.

September 11th 2007.

Europeans are saying “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!” “NO SHARIA HERE!”

So join the call. All European nations must be represented.

SO, IF YOU LOVE FREEDOM,

IF YOU LOVE YOUR COUNTRY,

- BE THERE!!

The organisers of the demonstration are:
SIAD (Denmark) sioe@siad.dk

No Sharia Here (England) sioe.nsh@btinternet.com

We have contact with Akte-islam in Germany. They are organizing the german participation: http://akte-islam.de/1.html

We are encouraging others to form similar groups in their own countries.

We seek people/organisations from all other european countries who will organize participation from their own country. We need bloggers to help us spread the word. We have to start now.
For questions or coordination between countries contact SIAD or No Sharia Here.

STOP ISLAMISATION OF EUROPE:
ORIGINS:

Stop Islamisation Of Europe (SIOE) is an alliance of people across Europe with the single aim of preventing Islam becoming a dominant political force in Europe.
It originated with the joining of SIAD, a political party dedicated to stopping the Islamisation of Denmark, with a loose association of people in England whose rallying cry is “No Sharia Here” and who want to maintain English law and stop the creeping growth of sharia law in England.

SIOE is growing in Europe with the amalgamation of similarly minded groups.

The newest blog on the block.

Well, at least for the moment!

This blog is intended to spread the word, that we, the silent, the uncomplaining and now finally the impatient, have lost faith in our politicians and need to start our own resistance to the creeping islamisation of Europe.

This site has been created on the initiative of SIAD, the organisation to stop the islamisation of Denmark.  Through it, we will publicise our thoughts and opinions and tell you things that the mainstream media dare not.

Welcome here.