Friday, January 23, 2009

"to gain votes by a despicable method"

Another politician is in the dock - not for fraud, incompetence, dishonesty or one of the many other possibilities, but for saying the wrong things about the wrong people :

Last Wednesday another European politician living under police protection following Muslim death threats, was convicted by a court in Austria to a suspended jail sentence of three months and a fine of 24,000 euros.

Susanna Winter, a member of the Austrian Parliament, came to the court room in Graz under heavy police protection to defend herself against allegations of “inciting racial hatred and degradation of religious symbols and religious agitation.” In January 2008, Mrs. Winter, a member of the Austrian Freedom Party FPÖ, said that the prophet Muhammad was “a child molester” because he married a six-year-old girl. She also said Muhammad was “a warlord” who had written the Koran during “epileptic fits.” The politician added that Islam is “a totalitarian system of domination that should be cast back to its birthplace on the other side of the Mediterranean.” She also warned for “a Muslim immigration tsunami,” saying that “in 20 or 30 years, half the population of Austria will be Muslim” if the present immigration policies continue.

Following these remarks, Muslim extremists threatened to kill Mrs. Winter, who was subsequently placed under police protection. “I do not feel guilty of racial incitement,” Mrs. Winter told the court. The judge, however, disagreed. He told the elected member of parliament: “You have only one goal: to gain votes by a despicable method, by appealing to xenophobic feelings.” The judge also argued that it is impossible to write during epileptic fits.

Now, as regular readers will be aware, I'm not totally in tune with Ms Winters. I'm not temperamentally averse to living under a theocracy where the head of state is, under God, also the head of the state religion. A light-touch theocracy, where divorce and adultery are frowned on (and career-wreckers), outraging public decency in the theatre, cinema, newspaper or television attracts severe and immediate sanction, the differences between the sexes are acknowleged, blasphemy or profaning the holy day are punished, where abortion and attempted suicide are illegal. After all, I lived under just such a theocracy until the late 60s. The Queen is still officially head of the Church of England, it's just that the Church seems to have dropped Christianity.

Trouble is I'm not sure the only theocracy currently on offer is a terribly light-touch one. And I think that's what Ms Winter's worried about, too.


Anonymous said...

Mohamedanism is a religion of peace! And if you disagree with us we will kill you!

I'm watching the enormous BNP surge at the moment in council elections. I think that they are reaching a critical mass.

The ballot box backlash is going to happen all over Europe, and it's going to come very rapidly. People are smelling an existential threat. People are looking around them and asking what the hell is going on.

Repatriation, harsh as it might sound, may be the only thing to avert war. We thought we could live with Islam. It was a mistake. We got married under false pretences. And in that situation, as any good Catholic will tell you, an annulment is a legitimate option.

Homophobic Horse said...

"A light-touch theocracy, where divorce and adultery are frowned on (and career-wreckers), outraging public decency in the theatre, cinema, newspaper or television attracts severe and immediate sanction, the differences between the sexes are acknowleged, blasphemy or profaning the holy day are punished, where abortion and attempted suicide are illegal. After all, I lived under just such a theocracy until the late 60s. The Queen is still officially head of the Church of England, it's just that the Church seems to have dropped Christianity."

The we forgot all this and now look at us. If it goes on for one more generation Britain will be beyond recovery of any kind. Worse then WW1 and WW2 combined.

Homophobic Horse said...

Still, there's no point trying to revive those laws. We no longer have the spiritual development to appreciate the wisdom of those laws and customs, so it's only inevitable they seem preposterous.

Homophobic Horse said...

Those laws and customs are profoundly illiberal and extremely realistic.Life is regarded as fundamentally worth living and selfish wickedness to throw away. Procreation is regarded with a seriousness that moderns can't even imagine.

Anonymous said...

Dear Hugh, wish you were right. Are the BNP any good, though?

Dissatisfaction with Griffin runs high in some bits of the psrty, where they cynically spell his name GRI££IN. I remember when NG actively courted Islam, seeking money and support from the Ayatollah and Qadaffi. NG, however, seems to be pro-Zionist now - so if he supports the invasion by aliens of ONE country, he might not be QUITE sound on what should happen here...
Repatriation will actually BEGIN war. Think of the logistics. OK if you can get remove them all at one fell swoop, but if you shift just a few - and we're going to lead a LOT of muscle even for that - the others will all go apeshit. How are you going to do it? Street by street, or by age-group? Offer them money, or point guns at them? Will the police help? Not likely.
I never thought with you, Hugh, that we COULD live with Islam. It wasn't a mistake, it was a crime. NG believed you: he used to recommend to his earlier disciples Qadaffi's Little Green Book, and regarded him as a POLITICAL SOLDIER. There were also folks on the "militant right" who recommended the writings of one Rene Guenon, a codosopher who converted to Islam. I think there are many more Islamic members of the House of lords, MPs, mayors and councillors in this country than there are really active members of the BNP.
I'm afraid you will need more than some papers in a ballot-box to shift 'em!
AND you'll need the assistance of a powerful religious belief - you have to oppose the Islamic set of ideals with another one, stronger and more rationally-based, such as traditional orthodox Christianity. How many are really going to risk their lives just so we can go on having Russell Brand and chips and corrupt banking and stupid pop music - there's not really much of the spirit of Lepanto about now, I'm afraid.

Anonymous said...

I think the majority of native Brits have what I call the Sundance Delusion - if things get really bad we can always skip the country for Bolivia. Laban has documented many cases of "white flight".

At the moment these movements are quite marginal. What will be interesting to see, and which I haven't heard discussed, is what happens as the margin gets bigger. I can imagine millions of pensioners going somewhere warm or simply less "vibrant", still receiving the pension and healthcare they've contributed to all their lives. But I can't see the attraction to today's children of hanging around just so they can pay off the national debt their feckless parents (that's us!) ran up for them.

It won't be inter-community (sorry) war or a clash of cultures. It'll be economics that brings things to a head.

Anonymous said...

"shillingajar said..."
NG's stance on Palestine is one of neutrality, he is not pro-Zionist, that is absurd. People cannot have it both ways.

Repatriation would be a measured process, starting with expedients such as banning halal slaughter, bin-liners, regulating mosques - a lot of them will get the message at that point

Of course the BNP cannot do it on its own - muscular Christianity AND Nationalism will be required, it is not either or. As will the committment of the armed forces. Does Prince Hal actually like being patronisingly lectured by an oily corrupt Muslim slug like Vaz?. With levering out tactics supported by the armed forces it can be done. To talk of civil war is nonsense, just so long as the enrichers do not have small arms, mortars, RPGs etc

The BNP will make considerable ground gains in the context of economic collapse - this will be the battering ram, the Westminster regime will simply disintegrate - look to 1640/1/2 as the model.

Anonymous said...

This is an example of true Christian generosity and optimism, some might say naivety:

The decision to spend money on a new church school, knowing that almost every pupil would be Muslim, had been taken because “we’re here for the long term”.

“Demographics change. There was certainly a Christian population there at one time and, who knows, 20 years from now the Christians might be back. This is not the time for us to pull out.

Anonymous said...

Sgt. Troy, welcome back.

Anonymous said...

The BNP is more than NG.

However flawed he me and the party may be in the long run their impact will be felt.

No doubt other leaders will emerge in time.

Anonymous said...

Yes, well, I'm not sure.
Have a look at the link above, Sgt Troy. If it doesn't work (and I'm not much good at all this Internet malarkey) try Googling BNP and pro-Zionist together.
If what it shows is all invented, then, To arms, citizens, and flatten the Reds, but if it's not, we need less flag-waving and more thought.
Don't really agree about the 17th century parallels, either: one of the things Charles I needed Ship Money for was to police Islamic maritime predators, who were actually kidnapping English folk from seaside villages. The left of the day rejected Charles's demands, and in the name of self-determination murdered him, established a theocracy, AND THEN OPENED THE COUNTRY TO FOREIGN INVADERS.
They strengthened their hold on us under Charles II, arranged for the Crown to be usurped by William III, established the Bank of England, invented the National Debt, and then fixed the Crown on the Hanoverians, who still wear it today. References to "Prince Hal" ("Bluff", anyone?) may evoke Tudor echoes, but the only decent Tudor was Mary, and the rot started under Henry VIII, Edward and Bloody Bess. This last was actively conspiring with the Grand Turk to destroy Catholic Christendom: their common ground was a hatred of the Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation, expressed in its fulness through the Catholic Mass. Charles I was generally a good guy, and deserves credit for his overcoming the dreadful heredity wished on him by the unspeakable James I.
No good appealing to the Hanoverians, her spiritual heirs in appealing to a sort of fossil patriotism, to lead us! (By "fossil" I mean something whose inner essence has been totally altered, although its outward appearance misleadingly remains unaltered. Followers of fossil patriotism have Titus Oates as their mascot.

Anonymous said...

Can't see the Beaners doing that well out of the economic crisis.

Any ethnic nationalist grouping needs an ethnic enemy to mobilise against, hence their concentration on Muslims. Plus you can't really get away with demonising Jews any more.

But many more people will be concerned with matters of economic competence. Hating Muslims doesn't put bread on the table.

The Beaners would have to be spectacularly unlucky not to make some gains. More local councillors, some MEPS, maybe even an MP somewhere.

But the real gains will be enjoyed by the Conservatives. Once again we'll be the ones to lift Britain out of yet another Labour-created mess.

Anonymous said...

The Conservatives are implicit in this mess too. Who deregulated the City? With the state that the country is in, the Tories should have a huge poll lead - but they don't. People look at the likes of Cameron and Osborne and see the type of City shysters who have contributed to wrecking this country.

Anonymous said...

Wrong. Ken Clarke had the economy on a good footing during his time as Chancellor. Labour have predictably squandered the legacy of pragmatic economic competence he built, including a regulatory framework for the City that actually worked.

You may recall how Brown scrapped that and replaced it with the current tripartite system, the shortcomings of which are now painfully obvious.

Thankfully Clarke's back, but we need Hague to take over from Osborne. Hague could be better used than in his role as Shadow Foreign Secretary.

Prediction: our poll lead will grow as the full extent of Brown's economic incompetence is realised.

Anonymous said...

The New World Order for Dummies.

What Jaq boots Smithy is really up to with her ID card scheme.

Anonymous said...

Oh pur-lease! Tory saviours, indeed!
Chesterton provides a little quote that was hijacked much later by the anarchists, "If voting could change anything, it would be abolished."
If we had a 300 seat Tory majority in the next Parliament, we'd still have the Special Relationship with the US of A, there would still be the same bunch of anonymous International Bankers pulling the strings. The public culture would still be the same, gay weddings, crap music, corruption, continued immigration. Oh yes, the Tories make a great deal of noise about this: Powell confronted that last issue and helped the Tories win the 1970 election, but was immediately disowned and called to order by the great and good, and look how he ended up, pathetically calling on men of good will to vote Labour! Thatcher pretended she would stop us whites being submerged: to what effect?
Perhaps there hasn't been a proper parliamentary opposition for years: perhaps there's just a power structure that displays a different facet every now and then. Why, Brown and Cameron might even have their little spats scripted for them: I've met a political speech-writer and he was willing to exploit his poor talents for whoever would pay him. I don't think he was the poor hack who provided Thatcher with her solitary but famous joke (burning - turning - haha, geddit?)and the faithful only laughed at that because it was expected of them, not because many of them had ever heard of Christopher Fry.

The only policies that would change would be on silly little details like

Anonymous said...

About Ken Clarke.

From the link, Clarke says:

A lot will depend on relations with Europe, because Obama doesn't want his strongest European ally led by a rightwing nationalist.

Here we see part of the Obama effect. A supposed 'conservative' rolling over and playing dead.


Screw Clarke, I wouldnt piss on him if he was on fire.

Anonymous said...

This comment on The Times website epitomised so much in so few words.

The Statement that he is the worst foreign secretary is ludacris!
what mr miliband is doing is a veryy good job just showing that he has the potential to be the future prime minister!! after robin cook david is the best foreign secetary. and his comments on kashmir were the truth truth hurts!!!

waqar, oldham

Bambibasher said...

How can claiming that Islam is bad be racial discrimination, Islam is a religion not a race and therefore to claim it is bad surely is no worse than stating "Cold is gods way of telling us to burn more catholics!" or should we hand over Rowan Atkinson to the Austrians or maybe the Vatican?

Anonymous said...

Don't see your joke, Bambibasher. There are a few ignorant sods around, not just from Belfast, who DO want to burn Catholics. Actually, it's Rowan's brother RODNEY you should look at: issued a strange book a few years ago "Fascist Europe Rising" which defines the EU as - yes, that good old bogey to scare the stupid -A CATHOLIC PLOT. He also compares the late Blair's horoscope to that of Hitler, to their mutual disadvantage.
Anyone know anything about a French political invention which appears to abolish the traditional Franco-German mutual dislike and actually creates a Franco-German axis? Earlier protagonists of The United States of Europe apparently went for it big, as did Monnet and Mitterand. It's called Synarchy, or in French, "synarchie".
If this really IS in control, then all our national governments can really ever do is (taking up my previous post from where it was accidentally amputated,) is to fiddle with traffic speeds, pub licenses, bus liveries and lollipop ladies' uniforms. Here comes the hijab!

Bambibasher said...

No joke just a point made about where do we draw the line over racial/religeous discrimination, if those are the laws in her country then she is silly to have not had an escape plan ready for court! As for the EU I distrust additional layers of government at local and eu wide levels. There have been some useful things from the EU but also far too much restrictions that our elected reps are happy to rubber stamp and enforce like no other state will.
I have been to Belfast in the 1980s and I have no problem with Catholics!
Its murderous scum terrorist I hold no truck with regardless of creed!

Anonymous said...

Hello Bambibasher: I agree with you about terrorists.
Also I'm not TOO worried about(in fact, very tolerant of) certain forms of racial discrimination. Discrimination really only means being aware of differences, not applying preferential or hostile measures. As for religious discrimination (in its colloquial sense) well, to tell the truth, I'm for that too.
I don't think that English Christians have any duty to be ruled in their own country by foreign non-Christians. If there are Moslems in the House of Lords or in the police, let them be treated by us as a sort of Military Police, here to control their like at our bidding, but not to have any power over we indigenous folk!
Arranged in order of preference on the candidates' list of potential next-door neighbours, sharers of bus-seats, et al, here they are:
1) All ranked fairly equal - White mainstream Christians, white non-Christians who possess a conservative culture (Simon Heffer would be welcome as long as he doesn't support the unspeakable Dawkins), and non-white Christians as long as they didn't subscribe to some loony devil-obsessed cult.
2)Next come orthodox and non-Zionist Jews, as long as they don't have to get into the mikvah if they accidentally bump into my wife at the pillar box.
3)Humanist and non-believing Jews, who despite not believing in God, nevertheless expect His promises about Zion to be realised literally, for their benefit.
4)Well, I've actually read the Koran several times, in two different translations, and debated the matter with Moslems, so I'm afraid that if any hijabists or jihadists came along, of whatever colour, I'd move.Recently an Abdul on a local bus told off a white man for bringing his dog aboard: the silly owner supinely apologised.
HE won't be taking part in the great Mosque grab.
I don't know know what I'm talking about, eh? aAclose family member married a Moslem - a fairly liberal one who mercifully kept beatings to a fairly reasonable level, just enough to save face and ensure respect. 20 years of misery, due to a halfwitted property deal which was part of the marriage contract.
But as the great English public put up with the cruelties of the Reformation, welcomed the "Glorious" Revolution and answered their rulers' calls for more and more wars against their brothers, I don't see much hope.
But what exactly, Anonymous at 9.06pm, do you really think "leaders" do?

Anonymous said...

shillagajar, "Thatcher pretended she would stop us whites being submerged: to what effect?"

To the effect that annual net migration during the 1980s averaged out at just 5,000 a year.

Under 'New' Labour it has topped 200,000 a year.

Anonymous said...

"Chesterton provides a little quote that was hijacked much later by the anarchists, "If voting could change anything, it would be abolished." "

I would be dismayed if G K CHesterton really had thought up that aphorism. It is surely too clumsy and silly to have been his work.

The only attribution I can find on the 'net is to Emma Goldman, an American anarchist active in the early years of the 20th century.

Whoever the author, it is rubbish for two reasons.

First, it is self-evident that voting can change a great deal. Different governments, from those led by Lloyd George, to Attlee, to Thatcher, to Blair, have changed national life in profound ways.

Second, the aphorism seems either an excuse for apathy, or a consolation for those whose ideas are too outlandish or repugnant ever to win popular support.

Like the child who, when denied some long-sought-after toy, screams that he never wanted it in the first place.