• Home

Islamic State ambitions for world domination have been brewing for a long time. Not a secret.

A kindly BBC anchor woman put on her best serious face before introducing in cut crystal accents the latest flickering images of populations being murdered on camera. One scene dissolved to another in a crescendo of severity – gut wrenching and finally mind deflecting. How can we look on babes starving to death before our eyes; mothers pleading into our hopeless hearts?

Had we only been forewarned. If only our world leaders could have been alerted in time to deflect this Tsunami of murderous evil.

Really, well President Clinton (remember him?) knew all about it. Way back  in 2000 he got the heads up from the man best placed to brief him.  In fact every world leader was briefed. Every global news service got it on the wire. The chances of, say, The Times (London) or any other international title being missed out is remote.

Now its your turn. Be angry? No, be afraid! Certainly be warned. Terror is already active in a street near you.

Sudan Relief and Rescue Inc. News Brief; Issued at public press conference, Washington D.C. March 2000.

The statement was issued by Bishop Macram MAx Gassis of El Obeid, Sudan after the Sudanese military bombed a Catholic school, killing the pupils and teachers. It was just the latest (then) genocidal act in the long civil war against the Christian population of Southern Sudan by the Islamic government in Khartoum.

 

“My beloved people of the Nuba mountains, and Kauda in particular, I greet you in the Lord Jesus Christ, who is our consolation in our tribulation, grief, and suffering.

Dearly beloved, the bombing of our Catholic school and the murder of our children is an outrage against God and humanity. I am deeply grieved, as are our friends here in the United States where I sojourn in order to bring our plight — the unjust persecution that is inflicted upon us — to the attention of the World community.

Time and again, I have told the world that the National Islamic Front (I.S.) is waging genocide against Christians, Africans and non-Arabs in order to establish a radical Islamic State. This terrible, heart-breaking incident is yet another example that this war is a religious and ethnic war launched by the regime of Khartoum and is aimed at the destruction of my people. We cannot bring back our 21 children murdered in Kauda by the regime. Today there are many Rachels in Kauda, mourning the loss of their children.

But we must insist that the international community act before it is too late.

I have appealed to the churches, particularly those in the United States, to pray for us, to entreat God to grant us peace and justice. And I assure you of this — in many churches in the United States, our brothers in Christ — Catholics and Protestants — are praying for us.

I have taken our petition to the government of the United States.

President Clinton issued a strong condemnation of the bombing. Secretary of State Madeline Albright, with whom I met for over an hour, continues to condemn the the actions of the regime against the innocent people of the Sudan, and against you in particular.

Let us pray they will take resolute action to stop the aerial bombardment in the future.”

In fifteen years this Islamic onslaught against Christians has spread to envelope the Middle East. The strategy has been clear throughout that time. It has never deviated. Christianity is its first enemy. Its goal is nothing less than a world dominated by Islam. Islam as preached and enforced by the fanatics of the Islamic State.

Historical footnote: When Christendom was divided and weak in the aftermath of religious division the combined forces of Islam launched its greatest assault on Europe. Critically the European forces repelled the Caliph at the sea battle of Lepanto. Piers Paul Reid pointed out in his brilliant account of that campaign that a line was drawn behind which Islam had to stop. Until recently, the Socialist Government of Mr. Tony Blair, it had never been breached. Today significant areas in British townships are microcosms of Islamic anti-Christian stresses.

 

 

 

Does anybody out there still remember what’s meant by a free country or just how free do you think you are in today’s United Kingdom?

Newshawk asked 37 politicians from national and local government chosen at random (i.e. those who bothered to answer the phone) for a definition of democracy. They were then asked to define a democrat. Both definitions were considered by the Newshawk political team to be important, basing this on Plato’s argument that the people are members of what rules them: “Seek not to rule a people without god!” Thus if you want to operate a democracy you must first find the democrats as we pointed out in the first of this series.

hitsmiler

However, not one member of our political class questioned could come up with anything close to the classical definition of a democracy. Some specimen responses were: “Democracy is when not all of the people can be fooled all of the time; something like that? No, it’s when they can’t fool all of them all the time!”

A local politician described democracy thus: “It being able to vote in a polling station wit proper curtains so his vote cannot be seen so he can be kept private …” Another when asked what would comprise a good democrat voter answered: “A good Democrat is an American who votes for the Democrats!”

A democracy according to the Oxford English Dictionary is “Government by the people; that form of government  in which the sovereign power resides in the people and is exercised either directly by them or by officers elected by them.” The OED also admits a modern usage by which all have equal rights.

 

And the common sense answer to what makes a good democrat is exactly what makes a good citizen or even a good person. Thanks to Plato we can safely suggest that this is a man who can rule his own body.

When the great Hilaire Belloc during a Baliol dinner expressed his preference for republican over monarchial rule the senior master replied: “But where, Mr. Belloc, are we to find republicans?” It’s the same conundrum but one which this little foray into political matters will not seek to evade.

img-thingWe are not told what constraints if any are placed upon a people’s governing representatives or what is actually meant by the rights that all are owed equally. We have already touched upon the view of the Ms. Nichola Sturgeon, leaderette of the Scots separatists which is that she can do whatever she pleases simply because she has been elected and her party holds by the dogma that theirs is a “parliamentary democracy”. Obviously not the other kind of democracy we cannot but conclude. To go back to the OED it seems obvious that those members of the public elected to office are representing the sovereign power of the rest of the public and therefore obliged (by definition) to act according to the will of that portion of the population which empowered them. This at least clarifies that if the people are not in control of themselves they will scarcely provide a sovereign will worth representing.

So the question remains a valid one; who knows what Democracy really means today? Who remembers why Democracy was ever considered absolutely essential to a free society? And how quickly we have forgotten that as World War I erupted the World’s intelligentsia were already sneering at democracy as a “political anachronism” and, more critically, they were dismissing it as a “failing system” which placed intolerable constraints on “progress”, both economically and culturally.

What was then considered democracy’s preferred replacement? The answer believe it or not was Fascism. Let’s repeat that, the world consensus by a mile was for fascism to succeed limping, untidy democracy.

O.K. This was well before the three mightiest currents of fascism coalesced into the obvious abominations led by Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. George Bernard Shaw died convinced that Stalin was a superman. Mussolini got the trains running on time. Hitler’s social model was the envy of the Western ascendancy classes, the adulation of political academics. Yes, your grand dads and great grandmothers! Then the war came, and another war and all that embarrassment.

Democracy is splendid so long as there are democrats and they know what democracy means

DEMOCRACY needs democrats. But if you don’t know what democracy is how can you call yourself a democrat? So, do you know? Test yourself!

What is democracy? Describe a working democracy? But here’s the hard one … What exactly is a democrat?

If that’s too easy we can move up to A-level type questions. Is a Democracy a system of governance sufficient in itself or does the source of its energies, laws, and norms reside above or beyond it? Can democracy exist without ethics? For example can a democracy exist independently of a supportive*, sympathetic religion; certainly a system of ethics with enough moral authority to discourage naked ambition in leaders and at the same time influence each and every member of the population, not only to live by the law, but to accept responsibility for personal behaviour according to the dictates of, say, natural law? N.B. The Ten Commandments are described as a privileged expression of the natural law.

*Any alternative ethical dynamic may be substituted here so long as it can supply the optimum freedom for every citizen with a minimum sacrifice of personal freedom for the needs of society at large. Such an ethical system must also be constant, equitable, and available to the widest possible consensus. In short, the morality must fit the man and fit his fellows.

Confucius the ancient Chinese philosopher taught that while it was possible to make the population behave (by the rigorous enforcement of a myriad rules) they could still defy the rules but nobody would feel shame in doing so.

G. K. Chesterton wrote: “You can free yourself from the big law (Decalogue) but you won’t be free. You will find yourself bound up in a million little rules”. Sounds so like political correctness!

Before you attempt an answer to the above, consider some alternatives of which we have hard historical experience.