Trevor Loudon's New Zeal blog has moved to

redirecting you there now

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Glenn Beck "I Stand With Israel"

So do I.

Courtesy of The Daily Beck

U.S. Socialist Leaders Incite Youth Revolutionaries

I posted here on an upcoming national activist "teach-in" on "Debt, Austerity and Corporate Greed" being organized by Democratic Socialists of America leaders Frances Fox Piven and Cornel West.

D.S.A. and its youth wing Young Democratic Socialists and their various fronts are  getting right behind the event;
To join that movement and escalate the activism planned in the days, weeks and months ahead we are organizing a “National Teach-in on Debt, Austerity and How People Are Fighting Back...”
More than one hundred campuses have signed up to participate in the teach in. Scheduled for April 5th at 2 p.m. (Eastern Daylight Savings Time), the event seeks to counter the drumbeat of right-wing propaganda. Content will be streamed live to teach-ins organized in local communities from the national teach-in at Judson Memorial Church in New York City. The local teach-ins will use the streamed material and add their own speakers that focus on their community. DSA has endorsed this program and is encouraging local groups and YDS chapters to organize local events that connect to the national teach-in.  Jobs with Justice, the Student Labor Labor Project, and others are promoting the teach-in...
 Now we learn that three other prominent activists will join the "teach-in."
    Soros center, Sachs right, NY, May 2008
  • Jeffrey Sachs - One of the most dangerous socialists on the world stage. Sachs  is Director of the UN Millennium Project and is Special Advisor to United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan. He is also the Director of The Earth Institute at Columbia University. Sachs is a long time beneficiary of funding from George Soros controlled organizations. Sachs addresses the Party of European Socialists in Prague , Czech Republic , 6-7 December 2009, calling for higher taxes in the U.S. and worldwide re-distribution of wealth.
  • Heather McGhee -  Washington office chief of Demos,a radical New York "think" closely tied to Democratic Socialists of America and the far left Institute for Policy Studies. Barack Obama was a founding board member of Demos in the early 2000s, while Obama's one time "Green Jobs Czar" and "former" communist Van Jones served on the board of Demos a few years later.
  • Richard Trumka, President of the left dominated AFL-CIO and a long time affiliate of Democratic Socialists of America. Poul Rasmussen, leader of the Party of European Socialists and co-chair of the Global Progressive Forum has described Trumka as "one of the most progressive people in the United States of America"
This is a big deal.

Five of the most influential socialists in the country,  are inciting thousands of young college age activists to take to the streets of America.

The same people who gave us Egypt and Libya...

"Restoring Honor"

Another great song from my buddy Chris Ross.

"A Revolution's Brewing"

Love Lisa Mei's voice.

Watcher's Nominations - 03/30/11

Watcher’s Council Nominations March Madness Edition - 03/30/11
From: The Watcher's Council

(Graphic cheerfully filched from the legendary Iowahawk.)

Welcome to the Watcher’s Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the ‘sphere and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday.

Council News:

This week, The Grouch and Capitalist Preservation took advantage of my generous offer of link whorage and earned honorable mention status.

You can, too. Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.

Simply e-mail me a link at with the subject heading ‘Honorable Mention’ no later than Monday 6 PM PST to be considered for our honorable mention category and return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week.

It’s a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members, while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?

So, let’s see what we have this week…

Council Submissions
Honorable Mentions
Non-Council Submissions


Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Extremist Linked Sen. Schumer: "I Always Use the Word Extreme"

Charles Schumer
On Tuesday March 29, 2011 Senator Charles Schumer, New York was on a conference call talking to his colleagues (fellow Senators), but what he didn't know is that reporters were also listening in to the call.

On the call, He made reference to the Democrat's plan to use the word "extreme" to label the Tea Party for their calls for a balanced budget. Here's a segment of the audio which was recorded:

Transcript: "I always use the word extreme, that's what the caucus instructed me to do..., extreme cuts and all these riders, and Boehner's in a box. But if he supports the Tea Party there's going to inevitably [be] a shutdown. What we are trying to do here..." (audio cut off at this point)

Senator  Schumer has  clear ties to three extreme organizations.
  • The Council for a Livable World, founded in 1962 by long-time socialist activist and alleged Soviet agent, Leo Szilard, is a non-profit advocacy organization that seeks to "reduce the danger of nuclear weapons and increase national security", primarily through supporting progressive, congressional candidates who support their policies. The Council supported Charles E. Schumer in his initial successful Senate run as candidate for New York.
  • In 1997, Schumer was one of 33 co-sponsors of H.R. 950, the Job Creation and Infrastructure Restoration Act. The bill had originally been sponsored by Congressman Matthew Martinez at the request of over 50 prominent labor leaders - all of whom were known supporters or members of the Communist Party USA. The Communist party even delegated senior member Evelina Alarcon to oversee the bill's progress.
  • In 1998 Schumer enjoyed electoral support from Communist Party breakaway group, Committees of Correspondence.
    ...And he's got the audacity to call the Tea Party extreme?

    Socialist Labor Bosses Plan Mass Actions Across America

    An Emergency Labor Meeting was held in Cleveland, Ohio on March 4-5, 2011.

    Ninety-six union leaders and activists from 26 states and from "a broad cross-section of the labor movement" gathered at the Laborers Local 310 Hall in Cleveland in response to an invitation sent out in January urging them to “explore together what we can do to mount a more militant and robust fight-back campaign to defend the interests of working people.”

    Three weeks prior to the Emergency Labor Meeting (ELM), "unionists and community and student activists in Wisconsin unleashed a resistance movement against Governor Scott Walker’s union-busting and concessionary attacks that in a short time has breathed new life into the labor movement".

    Participants in the ELM took "full note of the new situation and of the grave dangers to the U.S. labor movement and to workers’ and democratic rights posed by Governor Walker’s attacks".

    They pledged to make the "fight against union-busting and the budget cuts/concessions in Wisconsin the centerpiece of an emergency action plan..."

    Part of the plan involves a nationwide "Day of Action" on April 4.
    Participants welcomed the call issued by Larry Cohen, International President of the Communication Workers of America to organize on April 4, the anniversary of the death of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. This call has since been supported by the AFL-CIO Executive Board, which is urging "movement-wide dramatic actions" on this day.
    The closed doors meeting was endorsed by some of American labor's most radical socialist labor leaders.

    These included Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism affiliates;
    Democratic Socialists of America affiliates;
    • Jos Williams, President, Washington Metro Council AFL-CIO
    • Henry Nicholas, President, National Union of Hospital and Health Care Employees, AFSCME
    • Jeff Crosby, President, North Shore Labor Council, Massachusetts
    • Bill Henning, Vice President, CWA Local 1180
    • Ed Sadlowski, Staff Representative, Wisconsin Council 40, AFSCME, AFL-CIO; Member, Local 938; membership in Council 40 Field and Support Staff Union
    • Jerry Tucker, former Intl UAW Exec Board Member; Center for Labor Renewal Co-Founder
    • Bill Fletcher, Jr.Center for Labor Renewal;
    • Dr. Jack Rasmus, Member, American Federation of Teachers University Council, University of California Berkley; Former National First Vice President, National Writers Union, UAW Local 1981; former local union Vice President and Business Representative, CWA Local 9415 and SEIU Local 715
    • Bill Leumer, Former President, International Association of Machinists Local 565; Co-Convenor, Workers Emergency Recovery Campaign
    • Steve Early, labor journalist, lawyer, and former CWA International Representative; author of Embedded with Organized Labor and The Civil Wars in U.S. Labor
    Communist Party USA affiliates;
    Also listed were affiliates of the Party for Socialism and Liberation, Socialist Party USA, International Socialist Organization and several members of the ultra radical anti Israel group American Labor for Palestine.

    The assembled socialists agreed that they must;
    Go to the streets to oppose the concessions demanded by the bosses and the government. There is plenty of money available without demanding givebacks from public employees, but this requires changing our nation's priorities to raise taxes on the rich, redirect war dollars to meet human needs, and more -- all demands that we must place on the federal government. We can no longer effectively deal with such crucial issues as health care and retirement through collective bargaining alone. 

    Instead of supporting wars of intervention, the labor movement should embrace international worker solidarity. The mutual declarations of support between protesters in Madison and insurgent independent unions in Egypt are a proud example that deserve wide emulation.
    The U.S labor movement is now completely dominated by socialists and communists. Given the chance they  intend to bring chaos to several major cities across America. They plan to  continue, until their man Barack Obama is re-elected President in 2012.

    "The Declaration of Independence"

    This was written for eternity.

    2nd Worst Ever U.S. President Visits Cuba

    From the Communist Party USA's Peoples World

    Jimmy Carter,  welcomed by Cuba's Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez, right,

    Former President Jimmy Carter began a three-day visit to Cuba yesterday, amidst a stormy background of seemingly constant escalation and de-escalation of tensions between the U.S. and the island nation...

    Carter visited Cuba previously in 2002, the first and only U.S. president to visit Cuba since the 1959 revolution. According to the Cuban press, the visit "was a demonstration of his interest in better bilateral relations..."

    The ex-president's trip takes place during uncertain times for the island nation and its relationship with the United States. In what some consider the beginning of a thaw, the Obama administration loosened restrictions that President Bush had imposed on exchanges with Cuba...

    Carter's visit comes just before the next congress of the Cuban Communist Party, set to take place next month...

    The party congress is one of the main reasons for Carter's visit. According to the Carter Center, he and former first lady Rosalynn Carter traveled to Cuba to "meet with President Raúl Castro and other Cuban officials and citizens to learn about new economic policies and the upcoming party congress, and to discuss ways to improve U.S.-Cuba relations..."

    While Carter's trip is technically a private venture, sponsored by his organization, analysts say some sort of policy announcement, either from the Cuban side, the U.S. or both, is possible.

    Russia, U.S. May Ease Visa Regime 'In Foreseeable Future'

    Wouldn't Russian intelligence and their buddies in the Russian mafia just love this?

    From Novosti
    Russia and the United States may ease or even cancel visa regime fairly soon, the head of the State Duma's committee on international affairs said on Wednesday.

    Vladimir Putin told U.S. Vice President Joe Biden in early March that Russia and the United States would take an "historic step" by abolishing visas. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said some two weeks later that Moscow is currently persuading the U.S. to sign an agreement to scrap visas for visits lasting under 90 days.

    "The idea seems fantastic to some, but I'm convinced that it is pragmatic and may be implemented in the foreseeable future, if not the full abolishment then at least eased visa procedures," Konstantin Kosachev told the World Russian Forum annual conference in Washington.

    He said that Russia was ready to ease visa regime on the condition that the concessions are mutual.

    The Russian authorities have long been trying to persuade Europe to drop visas for Russian citizens, but their attempts have so far yielded no significant results.
    Let's bypass the horse. This is like the Trojans handing the Greeks the keys to their city.

    Beck Touches Many Bases

    Courtesy of The Daily Beck

    Tuesday, March 29, 2011

    Some Views from the "Atlas Shrugged" Premiere

     When I first encountered Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" as a teen back in the '70s, it was like being hit across the forehead with a cricket bat.

    It was pretty hard going for a "bleeding heart" leftie  Kiwi boy, brought up on free milk, family benefits and eternal gratitude for our "benevolent" welfare state.

    Now "Atlas Shrugged", first released the year before I was born,  is a feature film, with a Kiwi actor Grant Bowler, playing the leading role!

    Millions have now read the book, second only in influence, in to the Bible. I never woulda dreamed this possible, back in the day.

    "Atlas Shrugged" premiered on March 23 at the Heritage Foundation in Washington DC.

    Here's what some of the lucky attendees had to say.

    "Global Governance" Explained

    Very reasoned analysis of the movement towards "global governance" from veteran commentator Henry Lamb.

    This comes from 2002, but is still very relevant and  worth the time.

    Melanie Phillips - British Media Incites Mass Murder and Hatred

    Some of the straightest talking on the anti - Israel media you will ever hear, from the great Melanie Phillips.

    Just Who is the West Helping in Libya?

     From The Telegraph

    Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi
    Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime.
    In an interview with the Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore, Mr al-Hasidi admitted that he had recruited "around 25" men from the Derna area in eastern Libya to fight against coalition troops in Iraq. Some of them, he said, are "today are on the front lines in Adjabiya".
    Mr al-Hasidi insisted his fighters "are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists," but added that the "members of al-Qaeda are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader". 
    His revelations came even as Idriss Deby Itno, Chad's president, said al-Qaeda had managed to pillage military arsenals in the Libyan rebel zone and acquired arms, "including surface-to-air missiles, which were then smuggled into their sanctuaries".
    Mr al-Hasidi admitted he had earlier fought against "the foreign invasion" in Afghanistan, before being "captured in 2002 in Peshwar, in Pakistan". He was later handed over to the US, and then held in Libya before being released in 2008.
    US and British government sources said Mr al-Hasidi was a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, or LIFG, which killed dozens of Libyan troops in guerrilla attacks around Derna and Benghazi in 1995 and 1996.
    Even though the LIFG is not part of the al-Qaeda organisation, the United States military's West Point academy has said the two share an "increasingly co-operative relationship". In 2007, documents captured by allied forces from the town of Sinjar, showed LIFG emmbers made up the second-largest cohort of foreign fighters in Iraq, after Saudi Arabia.

    Earlier this month, al-Qaeda issued a call for supporters to back the Libyan rebellion, which it said would lead to the imposition of "the stage of Islam" in the country.
    Yep, that's what we all want. Western blood and treasure making the world safer for al-Qaeda.

    Monday, March 28, 2011

    "The Man Who Was Thursday"

     As good an explanation of "progressivism" as you are likely to see.

    Thanks to Eileen.

    Preemptive Anarchy

    By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

    Using the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine, Marxists of the world are uniting to blaze a bloody trail across the globe in order to form an iron-fisted new world order. All in the disingenuous name of protecting the world's populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. Which by the way, are subject to a very fluid and subjective interpretation.

    Let's be blunt. Gadhafi is a monster and a murderous dictator. He should have been removed and brought to justice 25 years ago for murdering Americans and our troops. But we are not the world's policemen and Libya currently poses no threat to the US. Obama bypassed Congress and the Constitution and went straight to George Soros, Cass Sunstein, Samantha Powers and the UN. This should be an impeachable offense.

    The Middle East is on fire in a whole list of countries, but the only one we intervene in is Libya. Why? Well, I believe that Libya is at least on the face of the matter, a test case for R2P. If the UN and world powers are successful in getting away with going in with military might to determine who rules that country in the name of security and protection, what is to stop them from going into any country they please for virtually any reason they can manufacture? Who will stop them? Next on the docket for R2P: Israel and the US.

    R2P however INTENDS to police the world:
    The mission of the R2P Coalition is:
    • To convince the American people and its leaders to embrace the norm of the responsibility to protect as a domestic and foreign policy priority.
    • To convince our political leadership that the US must join the ICC.
    • To convince our political leadership to empower the UN and the ICC with a legitimate and effective deterrent and enforcement mechanism - an International Marshals Service - a standing international police force to arrest atrocity crimes indictees.
    If the United Nations does not approve of a certain government’s behavior, and that government’s leaders will not respond to sanctions and the threat of prosecution, they will be attacked militarily.

    Do you really believe the protests in the Middle East were spontaneous? That is laughable. It was prearranged, choreographed preemptive anarchy on a global scale to give justification to the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine. And so far, what Obama, Soros, Powers, Sunstein, world leaders and the UN have put in place while the rest of us were watching elsewhere, seems to be going off without a hitch. All the while, useful idiots in the media continue to miss the point in ways that either indicate complete incompetence or being absolutely on board with this one world diktat.

    Trevor Loudon of New Zeal has written a piece that every American needs to read and now: “Responsibility to Protect” – The End of National Sovereignty As We Know It? It is the first of a series that he will be writing on the subject and his research is superb. One wonders why it takes a Kiwi to do the research work that most Americans seem unwilling to do. The only other I have seen that has the spine to confront this is Glenn Beck. As usual, Mr. Beck does an in-depth, factual and professional job of exposing the facts behind this whole mess. The rest of the media seem to all be on the side of Marxists, radicals and one world enthusiasts, assuming they don't also suffer from the most widespread affliction of selective blindness ever.

    Remember, the ultimate goal is not itself anarchy. Anarchy is merely the vehicle. You can't convert the several sovereign nations of the world to a single monolithic governing entity without first engendering instability to create the necessary power vacuum, so that the self-appointed world rulers can step forward and save them. As is of course, their "responsibility."

    Did Socialists Choose Democrat's VP Candidate?

    Socialist's choice, Geraldine Ferrar
    Geraldine Ferraro, the U.S.'s first ever female vice presidential candidate died recently, aged 75.

    A leftist Democrat, Ferraro got her position, the same way many other senior Dems did - with the help of Marxists.

    It is a central theme of this blog that Barack Obama was promoted to the U.S. presidency, by an alliance of several Marxist groups including Democratic Socialists of America.

    While this sounds far-fetched to some, there is nothing new about socialists working inside the Democratic Party to put "their" candidates into very high positions.

    The late Millie Jeffrey was a leader in United Auto Workers and a high ranking Democrat in Michigan and on the national stage for decades.

    In 2000 President Bill Clinton presented Millie Jeffrey, with the nation's highest civilian honor bestowed by the U.S. Government, the Presidential Medal Of Freedom, with the citation stating that those awarded "have helped America to achieve freedom."

    Millie Jeffrey, center, red dress

    In the 1950 and 60s, Jeffrey was a Democratic Party National committeewoman from Michigan. In 1960, she helped campaign for John F. Kennedy, as a member of the Democratic National Committee.

    After mobilizing the Michigan Democratic Party behind JFK in 1960, she then reportedly pushed JFK to initiate the Peace Corps.

    Millie Jeffrey quit the DNC in the late 60s to protest the Vietnam War and to work for Robert Kennedy.

    Less publicized were the facts that Millie Jeffrey was also a long time leader of Democratic Socialists of America, a "midwife" to the radical Students for a Democratic Society and a veteran of the communist infiltrated Women's International League for Peace and Freedom.

    Jeffrey also traveled to the Soviet Union in 1969 and to the Peoples Republic of China in 1974.

    According to Democratic Socialists of America member and prominent journalist Harold Meyerson, Millie Jeffrey was an influential power broker inside the Democratic Party.

    From DSA's Democratic Left, Spring 2004
    In the early ‘70s, during her final years on the staff of the United Auto Workers, she (Jeffrey) helped found the National Women’s Political Caucus and launched a decade-long campaign to have Democratic National Convention delegate slots divided equally between men and women.''

    From her perch on several Democratic Party commissions, and using the contacts she’d acquired in 40 years of liberal activism, Millie built enough support for this wild-eyed notion that it was adopted by the 1980 convention.
    Next step was placing left-leaning Geraldine Ferraro on the Democrat ticket as the Party's first female vice presidential candidate.
    Millie then became “the unelected leader,” in the words of her co-conspirator Joanne Howes, of a committee of seven Democratic women promoting the idea of a female vice presidential candidate on the 1984 ticket. “By the fall of 1983,” recalls Howes, “we came to the conclusion that the right person was Gerry Ferraro” – then an obscure member of Congress from Queens. That required augmenting Ferraro’s visibility and bona fides, and as a result of “Millie’s strategic thinking,” says Howes, the group successfully pressured the party and Walter Mondale to make Ferraro chair of the convention platform committee. The rest is herstory.
    Joanne Howes,  like Millie Jeffrey, was close to D.S.A.'s parent  organization, the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee. Howes was also a founder and remains a board member of the U.S.'s largest Political Action Committee Emily's List which specializes in financing "Democratic, pro-choice women candidates".

    This is a good example U.S. left works inside the "Democratic" Party. A small group of party "insiders", led by socialists were perfectly capable of   putting "their" candidate into the Number 2 spot on the Democratic Party ticket. So much for the "democratic" part of Democratic Socialists of America.

    In 20 years time, will Democratic Socialists of America, or their Communist Party and Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism allies finally admit their role in putting Barack Obama into the White House?

    If they do, it will only because they no longer fear any opposition.

    Geert Wilders: The Failure of Multiculturalism and How to Turn the Tide

    Geert Wilders's speech at the Annual Lecture at the Magna Carta Foundation in Rome on March 25:

    Signore e signori, ladies and gentlemen, dear friends of the Magna Carta Foundation, molte grazie.

    Thank you for inviting me to Rome. It is great to be here in this beautiful city which for many centuries was the capital and the centre of Europe’s Judeo-Christian culture.

    Together with Jerusalem and Athens, Rome is the cradle of our Western civilization – the most advanced and superior civilization the world has ever known.

    As Westerners, we share the same Judeo-Christian culture. I am from the Netherlands and you are from Italy. Our national cultures are branches of the same tree. We do not belong to multiple cultures, but to different branches of one single culture. This is why when we come to Rome, we all come home in a sense. We belong here, as we also belong in Athens and in Jerusalem.

    It is important that we know where our roots are. If we lose them we become deracinated. We become men and women without a culture.

    I am here today to talk about multiculturalism. This term has a number of different meanings. I use the term to refer to a specific political ideology. It advocates that all cultures are equal. If they are equal it follows that the state is not allowed to promote any specific cultural values as central and dominant. In other words: multiculturalism holds that the state should not promote a leitkultur, which immigrants have to accept if they want to live in our midst.

    It is this ideology of cultural relativism which the German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently referred to when she said that multiculturalism has proved “an absolute failure.”

    My friends, I dare say that we have known this all along. Indeed, the premise of the multiculturalist ideology is wrong. Cultures are not equal. They are different, because their roots are different. That is why the multiculturalists try to destroy our roots.

    Rome is a very appropriate place to address these issues. There is an old saying which people of our Western culture are all familiar with. “When in Rome, do as the Romans do,” it says. This is an obvious truth: If you move somewhere, you must adapt to the laws and customs of the land.

    The multicultural society has undermined this rule of common sense and decency. The multicultural society tells the newcomers who settle in our cities and villages: You are free to behave contrary to our norms and values. Because your norms and values are just as good, perhaps even better, than ours.
    It is, indeed, appropriate to discuss these matters here in Rome, because the history of Rome also serves as a warning.

    Will Durant, the famous 20th century American historian, wrote that “A great civilization cannot be destroyed from outside if it has not already destroyed itself from within.” This is exactly what happened here, in Rome, 16 centuries ago.

    In the 5th century, the Roman Empire fell to the Germanic Barbarians. There is no doubt that the Roman civilization was far superior to that of the Barbarians. And yet, Rome fell. Rome fell because it had suffered a loss of belief in its own civilization. It had lost the will to stand up and fight for survival.

    Rome did not fall overnight. Rome fell gradually. The Romans scarcely noticed what was happening. They did not perceive the immigration of the Barbarians as a threat until it was too late. For decades, Germanic Barbarians, attracted by the prosperity of the Empire, had been crossing the border.

    At first, the attraction of the Empire on newcomers could be seen as a sign of the cultural, political and economic superiority of Rome. People came to find a better life which their own culture could not provide. But then, on December 31st in the year 406, the Rhine froze and tens of thousands of Germanic Barbarians, crossed the river, flooded the Empire and went on a rampage, destroying every city they passed. In 410, Rome was sacked.

    The fall of Rome was a traumatic experience. Numerous books have been written about the cataclysmal event and Europeans were warned not to make the same mistake again. In 1899, in his book ‘The River War,’ Winston Churchill warned that Islam is threatening Europe in the same way as the Barbarians once threatened Rome. “Mohammedanism,” Churchill wrote – I quote – “is a militant and proselytizing faith. No stronger retrograde force exists in the World. […] The civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.” End of quote.

    Churchill is right. However, if Europe falls, it will fall because, like ancient Rome, it no longer believes in the superiority of its own civilization. It will fall because it foolishly believes that all cultures are equal and that, consequently, there is no reason why we should fight for our own culture in order to preserve it.

    This failure to defend our own culture has turned immigration into the most dangerous threat that can be used against the West. Multiculturalism has made us so tolerant that we tolerate the intolerant.
    Ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake: Our opponents are keenly aware of our weakness. They realize that the pattern which led to the fall of Rome, is at play today in the West. They are keenly aware of the importance of Rome as a symbol of the West. Over and over again they hint at the fall of Rome. Rome is constantly on their minds.

    • The former Turkish Prime Minister Erbakan said – I quote: “The whole of Europe will become Islamic. We will conquer Rome”.
    • Yunis al-Astal, a Hamas cleric and member of the Palestinian Parliament said – I quote: “Very soon Rome will be conquered.”
    • Ali Al-Faqir, the former Jordanian Minister of Religion, stated that – I quote: “Islam will conquer Rome.”
    • Sheikh Muhammad al-Arifi, imam of the mosque of the Saudi Defence Academy, said – I quote: “We will control Rome and introduce Islam in it.”
    Our opponents are hoping for an event that is akin to the freezing of the Rhine in 406, when thousands of immigrants will be given an easy opportunity to cross massively into the West.
    • In a 1974 speech to the UN, the Algerian President Houari Boumédienne, said – I quote: “One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.” End of quote.
    • Libyan dictator Kadhafi said, I quote: “There are tens of millions of Muslims in the European continent today and their number is on the increase. This is the clear indication that the European continent will be converted into Islam. Europe will one day soon be a Muslim continent.” End of quote.

    Our opponents are aiming for a repetition of the fall of Rome in the 5th century and want to use exactly the same methods. “The strategy of exporting human beings and having them breed in abundance is the simplest way to take possession of a territory,” warned the famous Italian author Oriana Fallaci.

    However, the situation today could be worse than it was when the Roman Empire fell. The Germanic Barbarians who overran Rome were not driven by an ideology. After having sacked Rome, they eventually adopted the Judeo-Christian civilization of Rome. They destroyed Rome because they wanted its riches, but they realized and recognized that Roman civilization was superior to their own Barbaric culture.

    Having destroyed Rome, the Germanic tribes eventually tried to rebuild it. In 800, the Frankish leader Charlemagne had himself crowned Roman Emperor. Three hundred years later, the Franks and the other Europeans would go on the Crusades in defence of their Christian culture. The Crusades were as Oriana Fallaci wrote – I quote – a “counter-offensive designed to stem Islamic expansionism in Europe.” Rome had fallen, but like a phoenix it had risen again.

    Contrary to the Barbarians which confronted Rome, the followers of Muhammad are driven by an ideology which they want to impose on us.

    Islam is a totalitarian ideology. Islamic Shariah law supervises every detail of life. Islam is not compatible with our Western way of life. Islam is a threat to our values. Respect for people who think otherwise, the equality of men and women, the equality of homosexuals and heterosexuals, respect for Christians, Jews, unbelievers and apostates, the separation of church and state, freedom of speech, they are all under pressure because of islamization.

    Europe is islamizing at a rapid pace. Many European cities have large islamic concentrations. In some neighbourhoods, Islamic regulations are already being enforced. Women’s rights are being trampled. We are confronted with headscarves and burqa’s, polygamy, female genital mutilation, honour-killings. “In each one of our cities” says Oriana Fallaci, “there is a second city, a state within the state, a government within the government. A Muslim city, a city ruled by the Koran.” – End of quote.

    Ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake: The multiculturalist Left is facilitating islamization. Leftist multiculturalists are cheering for every new shariah bank, for every new islamic school, for every new mosque. Multiculturalists consider Islam as being equal to our own culture. Shariah law or democracy? Islam or freedom? It doesn’t really matter to them. But it does matter to us. The entire leftist elite is guilty of practising cultural relativism. Universities, churches, trade unions, the media, politicians. They are all betraying our hard-won liberties.

    Ladies and gentlemen, what is happening in Europe today has to some extent been deliberately planned.

    In October 2009, Andrew Neather, the former advisor of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, confirmed that the British Government had deliberately organized mass immigration as part of a social engineering project. The Blair Government wanted to – I quote – “make the UK truly multicultural.” To achieve this end, 2.3 million foreigners were allowed to enter Britain between 2000 and 2009. Neather says this policy has “enriched” Britain.

    Ordinary people, however, do not consider the decline of societal cohesion, the rise of crime, the transformation of their old neighborhoods into no-go zones, to be an “enrichment.”

    Ordinary people are well aware that they are witnessing a population replacement phenomenon. Ordinary people feel attached to the civilization which their ancestors created. They do not want it to be replaced by a multicultural society where the values of the immigrants are considered as good as their own. It is not xenophobia or islamophobia to consider our Western culture as superior to other cultures – it is plain common sense.

    Fortunately, we are still living in a democracy. The opinion of ordinary people still matters. I am the leader of the Dutch Party of Freedom which aims to halt the Islamization process and defend the traditional values and liberties in the Netherlands. The Party of Freedom is the fastest growing party in the Netherlands.

    Because the message of my party is so important, I support initiatives to establish similar parties in other countries, such as Germany, France and the United Kingdom, where they do not yet exist. Last month, a poll in Britain showed that a staggering 48 percent of the British would consider supporting a non-fascist and non-violent party that vows to crack down on immigration and Islamic extremists and restrict the building of mosques.

    In October last year, I was in Berlin where I gave a keynote speech at a meeting of Die Freiheit, a newly established party led by René Stadtkewitz, a former Christian-Democrat. German polls indicate that such a party has a potential of 20 percent of the electorate.

    My speech, in which I urged the Germans to stop feeling ashamed about their German identity drew a lot of media attention. Two weeks later, German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated that multiculturalism is “an absolute failure.” Horst Seehofer, the leader of the Bavarian Christian-Democrats, was even more outspoken. “Multiculturalism is dead,” he said.

    Last month, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said: “We have been too concerned about the identity of the immigrant and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.” – End of quote.

    Five weeks ago, British Prime Minister David Cameron blamed multiculturalism for Islamic extremism. “We have allowed the weakening of our collective identity,” he said. “Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live […] apart from the mainstream.” – End of quote.

    In his speech, David Cameron still makes a distinction between the Islamist ideology, which he calls extremist and dangerous, and Islam, which he says is peaceful religion. I do not share this view, and neither did Cameron’s great predecessor Winston Churchill. Stating that Islam is peaceful is a multiculturalist dogma which is contrary to the truth.

    Politicians such as Merkel. Sarkozy and Cameron still do not seem to have understood what the problem really is. Nevertheless, the fact that they feel compelled to distance themselves from multiculturalism is a clear indication that they realize they need to pay lip-service to what the majority of their populations have long understood. Namely that the massive influx of immigrants from Islamic countries is the most negative development that Europe has known in the past 50 years.

    Yesterday, a prestigious poll in the Netherlands revealed that 50 percent of the Dutch are of the opinion that Islam and democracy are not compatible, while 42 percent think they are. Even two thirds of the voters of the Liberal Party and of the Christian-Democrat Party are convinced that Islam and democracy are not compatible.

    This, then, is the political legacy of multiculturalism. While the parties of the Left have found themselves a new electorate, the establishment parties of the Right still harbour their belief that Islam is a religion of peace on a par with peaceful religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and others.
    The problem with multiculturalism is a refusal to see reality. The reality that our civilization is superior, and the reality that Islam is a dangerous ideology.

    Today, we are confronted with political unrest in the Arab countries. Autocratic regimes, such as that of Ben Ali in Tunisia, Mubarak in Egypt, Kadhafi in Libya, the Khalifa dynasty in Bahrain, and others, have been toppled or are under attack. The Arab peoples long for freedom. This is only natural.

    However, the ideology and culture of Islam is so deeply entrenched in these countries that real freedom is simply impossible. As long as Islam remains dominant there can be no real freedom.

    Let us face reality. On March 8, the International Women’s Day, 300 women demonstrated on Cairo’s Tahrir Square in post-Mubarak Egypt. Within minutes, the women were charged by a group of bearded men, who beat them up and dragged them away. Some were even sexually assaulted. The police did not interfere. This is the new Egypt: On Monday, people demonstrate for freedom; on Tuesday, the same people beat up women because they, too, demand freedom.

    I fear that in Islamic countries, democracy will not lead to real freedom. A survey by the American Pew Center found that 59 percent of Egyptians prefer democracy to any other form of government. However, 85 percent say that Islam’s influence on politics is good, 82 percent believe that adulterers should be stoned, 84 percent want the death penalty for apostates, and 77 percent say that thieves should be flogged or have their hands cut off.

    Ronald Reagan was right when he called Kadhafi a “mad dog.” However, we should not harbor the illusion that there can be real freedom and real democracy in a country where Islam is dominant. There is no doubt that the results of the Pew survey in Egypt apply in Libya, too. It is not in our interest to bring the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Tripoli and install a khalifate in Libya.

    Of course, the world has to stop Kadhafi from killing his own people. However, as UN Resolution 1973 stated last week, this is primarily the responsibility of – I quote – “in particular [the] States of the region.” End of quote. Why does a country like the Netherlands have to contribute six F16 fighter jets to enforce the arms embargo in Libya, while Saudi Arabia does not contribute a single plane from its fleet of nearly 300 fighter jets? Arabs are dying, but the Arab countries are shirking their responsibilities.

    And one of the major threats of the current crisis is not even addressed by our leaders: How are we going to prevent that thousands of economic fugitives and fortune seekers cross the Mediterranean and arrive at place like Lampedusa? Now that Tunisia is liberated, young Tunisians should help to rebuild their country instead of leaving for Lampedusa. Europe cannot afford another influx of thousands of refugees.

    Ladies and gentlemen,
    It is time to wake up. We need to confront reality and we need to speak the truth. The truth is that Islam is evil, and the reality is that Islam is a threat to us.

    Before I continue I want to make clear, however, that I do not have a problem with Muslims as such. There are many moderate Muslims. That is why I always make a clear distinction between the people and the ideology, between Muslims and Islam. There are many moderate Muslims, but there is no such thing as a moderate Islam.

    Islam strives for world domination. The koran commands Muslims to exercise jihad and impose shariah law.

    Telling the truth about immigration and warning that Islam might not be as benevolent as the ruling elite says, has been made a hate speech crime in several EU member states. As you probably know, I have been brought to court on charges of hate speech. That is the paradox of the multicultural society. It claims to be pluralistic, but allows only one point of view of world affairs, namely that all cultures are equal and that they are all good.

    The fact that we are treated as criminals for telling the truth must not, however, deter us. The truth that Islam is evil has always been obvious to our ancestors. That is why they fought. It was very clear to them that our civilization was far superior to Islam.

    It is not difficult to understand why our culture is far better than Islam. We Europeans, whether we be Christians, Jews, agnostics or atheists, believe in reason. We have always known that nothing good could be expected from Islam.

    While our culture is rooted in Jerusalem, Athens and Rome, Islam’s roots are the desert and the brain of Muhammad. Our ancestors understood the consequences very well. The Koran, wrote the historian Theophanes, who lived in the second half of the 8th century, is based on hallucinations.

    “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman,” the Byzantine Emperor Manuel II said in 1391, adding: “God is not pleased by blood – and not acting reasonable is contrary to God’s nature.”

    For 1,400 years, Westerners have been criticizing Islam and its founder because they recognized evil when they saw it. But then, suddenly, in the last decades of the past century, especially from the 1970s onwards, Western intellectuals stopped doing so.

    The moral and cultural relativism of Marxism led the West’s political and intellectual elites to adopt a utopian belief in a universal brotherhood of mankind.

    Multiculturalism is a culture of repudiation of Europe’s heritage and freedoms. It weakens the West day by day. It leads to the self-censorship of the media and academia, the collapse of the education system, the emasculation of the churches, the subversion of the nation-state, the break-down of our free society.

    While today – at last – our leaders seem to realize what a disastrous failure multiculturalism has been, multiculturalism is not dead yet. More is needed to defeat multiculturalism than the simple proclamations that it has been an “absolute failure.” What is needed is that we turn the tide of Islamization.

    There are a few things which we can do in this regard.

    One thing which we should do is to oppose the introduction of Sharia or Islamic law in our countries. In about a dozen states in the United States, legislation is currently being introduced to prevent the introduction of Sharia. In early May, I will be travelling to the U.S. to express my support to these initiatives. We should consider similar measures in Europe.

    Another thing which we should do is support Muslims who want to leave Islam. An International Women’s Day is useless in the Arab world if there is no International Leave Islam Day. I propose the introduction of such a day in which we can honor the courageous men and women who want to leave Islam. Perhaps we can pick a symbolic date for such a day and establish an annual prize for an individual who has turned his back on Islam or an organization which helps people to liberate themselves from Islam.

    It is very easy to become a Muslim. All one has to do is to pronounce the Shahada, the Islamic creed, which says – I quote “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” It should be equally easy to leave Islam by pronouncing a counter-Shahada, which says “I leave Islam and join humankind.”

    A third measure to turn the tide of Islamization is to reemphasize the sovereignty of the nation-state. The peoples of the free world will only be able to fight back against Islam if they can rally around a flag with which they can identify. This flag, symbolizing pre-political loyalty, can only be the flag of our nation. In the West, our freedoms are embodied in our nation-states. This is why the multiculturalists are hostile to the nation-state and aim to destroy it.

    National identity is an inclusive identity: It welcomes everyone, whatever his religion or race, who is willing to assimilate into a nation by sharing the fate and future of a people. It ties the individual to an inheritance, a tradition, a loyalty, and a culture.

    I want to elaborate a bit on this since we are gathered here today in Rome. Again, it is appropriate that we are in Rome. In this city, in 1957, and – what an ironic coincidence – on this very day, the 25th of March, the Treaty of Rome was signed. This Treaty obliges the member states of the European Union to aim for “an ever closer union.”

    Unfortunately, this union, like other multinational organizations, has become one of the vehicles for the promotion of multiculturalism. The EU has fallen in the hands of a multiculturalist elite who by undermining national sovereignty destroy the capacity of the peoples of Europe to democratically decide their own future.

    The new government in my country, which is supported by my party, wants to restrict immigration. That is what our voters want. But we are confronted by the fact that our policies have to a large extent been outsourced to “Europe” and that our voters no longer have a direct say over their own future.

    On account of international treaties, EU legislation prevails over national legislation and cannot be reversed by national parliaments. Indeed, in 2008, the European Court of Justice, the highest court in the EU, annulled both Irish and Danish immigration legislation. The Court stated that national law is subordinate to whatever is ruled on the European level. In March 2010, the European Court of Justice annulled Dutch legislation restricting family reunification for immigrants on welfare.

    The ease with which Europe’s political elite conducts an immigration policy aimed at the deracination of Europe shows the insensitivity of this elite. It willingly sacrifices its own people to its political goal, without any consideration for the people involved.

    Lower class blue-collar people have been driven from their neighborhoods. There is no respect for their democratic vote. On the contrary, people who do not agree with the multiculturalist schemes are considered to be racists and xenophobes, while the undefined offence of “racism and xenophobia” has been made central to all moral pronouncements by the European Union, the Council of Europe, the United Nations, and other supra-national organizations. This represents a systematic assault by the elite on the ordinary feelings of national loyalty.

    In 2008, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe stated that the member-states must – I quote – “condemn and combat Islamophobia” and ensure “that school textbooks do not portray Islam as a hostile or threatening religion.” – end of quote.

    In March 2010, the United Nations Human Rights Council passed a resolution criminalizing so-called “defamation of religions.” The resolution, authored by Pakistan, mentions only one religion by name: Islam. With its 57 member states the Organization of the Islamic Conference systematically uses its voting power in the UN to subvert the concept of freedom and human rights.

    In 1990, the OIC rejected the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and replaced it by the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which states in articles 24 that – I quote – “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Sharia.” – end of quote.

    This “human rights” charade has to stop if Western civilization wants to survive. Human rights exist for the protection of individuals, not religions and ideologies.

    The EU’s aim, meanwhile, seems to be to destroy the old sovereign nations and replace them by new provincial identities, which are all clones of each other. Britanistan will not differ from Netherlandistan, nor Germanistan from Italiastan, or any other province of the European superstate in the making.
    We must reclaim Europe. We can only do so by giving political power back to the nation-state.

    By defending the nation-states which we love, we defend our own identity. By defending our identity, we defend who we are and what we are against those who want to deracinate us. Against those who want to cut us from our roots, so that our culture withers away and dies.

    My friends,
    Twenty years after the ordinary people, Europe’s mainstream conservative leaders, such as Merkel, Sarkozy and Cameron, have finally – better late than never – come to the obvious conclusion, namely that multiculturalism is a failure. However, they do not have a plan to remedy the situation.

    Ladies and gentlemen, it is time for change. We must make haste. Time is running out. Ronald Reagan said: “We need to act today, to preserve tomorrow”. That is why I propose the following measures in order to preserve our freedom:

    First, we will have to defend freedom of speech. It is the most important of our liberties. If we are free to speak, we will be able to tell people the truth and they will realize what is at stake.

    Second, we will have to end cultural relativism. To the multiculturalists, we must proudly proclaim: Our Western culture is far superior to the Islamic culture. Only when we are convinced of that, we will be willing to fight for our own identity.

    Third, we will have to stop Islamization. Because more Islam means less freedom. We must stop immigration from Islamic countries, we must expel criminal immigrants, we must forbid the construction of new mosques. There is enough Islam in Europe already. Immigrants must assimilate and adapt to our values: When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

    Fourth, we must restore the supremacy and sovereignty of the nation-state. Because we are citizens of these states, we can take pride in them. We love our nation because they are our home, because they are the legacy which our fathers bestowed on us and which we want to bestow on our children. We are not multiculturalists, we are patriots. And because we are patriots, we are willing to fight for freedom.

    Let me end with a final – and a positive – remark: Though the situation is bad and multiculturalism is still predominant, we are in better shape than the Roman Empire was before its fall.

    The Roman Empire was not a democracy. The Romans did not have freedom of speech. We are the free men of the West. We do not fight for an Empire, we fight for ourselves. We fight for our national republics. You fight for Italy, I fight for the Netherlands, others fight for France, Germany, Britain, Denmark or Spain. Together we stand. Together we represent the nations of Europe.

    I am confident that if we can safeguard freedom of speech and democracy, our civilization will be able to survive. Europe will not fall. We, Europe’s patriots, will not allow it.

    Thank you very much.

    Courtesy of Jihad Watch

    "Multi-culturalism" - Do We Need Socialist, or Capitalist Solutions?

    While I agree with the sentiments in the above video, most commentators on "multiculturalism" seem to miss the main point.

    It is not immigration, even Islamic immigration that is the main problem. It is socialism.

    The United States in the 19th century and early part of the 20th century was an open, free society, with minimal, if any government welfare. Immigrants came to the U.S., and while some did "ghettoise" for a generation or two, all eventually integrated into the U.S. mainstream.

    The incentives were right. People came to the U.S. to escape the class stratification and statism of Europe to live free prosperous lives in a new world. The U.S. got the best of Europe and Asia, not the worst.

    The two groups that had the most difficulty integrating, the Blacks and the American Indians, were the groups that suffered most from welfarism and statism - the Blacks on slave plantations, the Indians on government funded reservations.

    If you want an open immigration immigration policy, you must also have an open economy and a free non socialist society.

    Because France and all other European countries are socialist and socially stratified, they tend to attract immigrants who want a free ride. After a generation or two of being confined to ghettoes and living largely off the state tit, the children of these immigrants become a dispirited, bitter, resentful, crime ridden, disloyal 5th columnists - easily manipulated by radical Imans, labor leaders, "community organizers" and Marxist revolutionaries.

    France and the rest of Europe must choose between the two futures below:
    • Turn France (Britain, Denmark, Sweden, Spain, Italy) into prosperous, low tax, free market, open constitutional societies, with no special favors for any social group. Rid the country of all state sponsored "multi-culturalism" and let individuals work out their own social arrangements as harmoniously as possible. Let freedom, capitalism and inter-marriage break down the social barriers.
    • Carry on down the statist road. Put new arrivals on welfare benefits and pander to their every cultural fetish, no matter how backward or barbaric. Throw money into their ghettos and encourage non-integration. This  will eventually lead to mass poverty, and  ever increasing social tensions, "solveable" only by mass re-patriations and/or civil war.
    This blogger favors the first option, but is not stupid enough to think it is likely.

    What do you think?

    Sunday, March 27, 2011

    A "Perfect Storm" Brewing in the West?

    Scenes from this weekend's anti budget cuts rally in London.

    This is London folks. This is not Syria, Libya, or even Greece. This is the heart of a first world nation.

    This will be coming to every Western Capital, to New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Detroit, Seattle....., if authorities and the media do not wake up to the fact that communist and anarchist ideas are now deeply rooted in certain sectors of all Western countries.

    It is not hard to identify the instigators of this chaos. What is hard, is to find leaders willing to stand up and name and confront these enemies of the free society.

    Communist Rioters Rock London

    As I wrote in February,  London  has been rocked by huge communist led anti budget cut rallies over the weekend.

    The Socialist Workers Party, Communist Party of Britain, Workers Liberty and several other marxist and anarchist groups have joined with labor unions to put 250-400,000 bodies on the streets - nowhere near that many brains.

    Will we also see an attempt to start an occupation of Trafalgar Square?

    Lovely little whitewash from MSNBC.

    The Kremlin's mouthpiece Russia Today is loving this. Here they interview John Rees of the Stop the Wars Coalition. Why does no one tell us that he is a leader of the Socialist Workers Party?

    Yep, communism is dead alright.

    Courtesy of

    "Just Like A Real War"

    Great new take on an old Bob Dylan classic.

    Beck Exposes the Fed

    Glenn Beck and a personal hero of mine G. Edward Griffin expose the U.S. Federal Reserve.

    Possibly the biggest financial scam of all time very well explained.

    Courtesy of The Daily Beck

    Saturday, March 26, 2011

    "Responsibility to Protect" - The End of National Sovereignty As We Know It?

    Why Did U.S. President Barack Obama order a military attack on Libya?  Why did he seek the permission of the United Nations Security Council, but not that of the U.S. Congress - as he is constitutionally obliged to do?

    Glenn Beck has explained President Obama's decision to attack Libya in terms of the  United Nations' "Responsibility to Protect Doctrine"

    Mr Beck is right.

    According to Radio Free Europe
    Those who justify the Libyan intervention on humanitarian grounds draw much of their logic from a concept which has dramatically gained ground over recent decades. The concept is known as "R2P," shorthand for the world's "Responsibility to Protect" civilians.
    But what does this catchy little phrase mean? Where did it come from? What are its implications?

    The United Nations reported in July 2009;
    The Obama administration is supporting moves to implement an U.N. doctrine calling for collective military action to halt genocide. In a week-long debate on implementing the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine, the U.S. joined a majority of U.N. countries, including Russia and China, in supporting implementation of the policy. The doctrine itself was approved in 2005 by more than 150 states including the U.S.
    The doctrine specifies that diplomatic options such as internal conflict resolution, sanctions, and prosecution by the International Criminal Court, should be used first. If they don't work, then a multi-national force approved by the Security Council would be deployed.
    In other words, if the United Nations does not approve of a certain government's behavior, and that government's leaders  will not respond to sanctions and the threat of prosecution, they will be attackeded militarily.

    The U.S. organization supporting  this concept, named unsurprisingly Responsibility to Protect is  affiliated to a financial planning firm,   General Welfare Group LLC, based in Oak Brook Illinois.

    According to the Responsibility to Protect website
    The doctrine of the responsibility to protect was first elaborated in 2001 by a group of prominent international human rights leaders comprising the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. Under their mandate, the Commission sought to undertake the two-fold challenge of reconciling the international community's responsibility to address massive violations of humanitarian norms and ensuring respect for the sovereign rights of nation states. 
    Led by Gareth Evans, former Foreign Minister of Australia, and Mohamed Sahnoun, Special Advisor to the UN Secretary-General, the Commission issued its report in December 2001. Focusing on the "right of humanitarian intervention", this report examined when, if ever, it is appropriate for states for take coercive - and in particular military - action, against another state for the purpose of protecting populations at risk. In essence, the group concluded that when a group (or groups) of people is suffering from egregious acts of violence resulting from internal war, insurgency, repression or state failure, and the state where these crimes are taking place is unable or unwilling to act to prevent or protect its peoples, the international community has a moral duty to intervene to avert or halt these atrocities from occurring. 
    Gareth Evans, an Australian Fabian Socialist and Mohamed Sahnoun  both  worked with leftist financier  George Soros in the highly influential  International Crisis Group.

    The "responsibility to protect" doctrine received renewed emphasis in 2004 when the United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan created the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change. The Panel was established to "identify major threats facing the international community in the broad field of peace and security and to generate new ideas about policies and institutions aimed at preventing or confronting these challenges".

    Panelists included;
    • Mary Chinery-Hess  (Ghana), Vice-Chairman, National Development Planning Commission of Ghana and former Deputy Director-General, International Labour Organization;
    • Gareth Evans (Australia), President of the  International Crisis Group  and former Minister for Foreign Affairs of Australia;
    • Amre Moussa  (Egypt), Secretary-General of the League of Arab States;
    • Yevgeny Primakov (Russia), former Prime Minister of the Russian Federation;
    • Qian Oichen  (China), former Vice Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China;
    • Nafis Sadik (Pakistan), former Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund;
    • Salim Ahmed Salim (United Republic of Tanzania), former Secretary-General of the Organization of African Unity; and
    • Brent Scowcroft (United States), former Lt. General in the United States Air Force and United States National Security Adviser.
    With respect to "Responsibility to Protect", the Panel endorsed this "emerging norm", stating that:
    There is a growing recognition that the issue is not the "right to intervene" of any State, but the "responsibility to protect"  of every State when it comes to people suffering from avoidable catastrophe mass murder and rape, ethnic cleansing by forcible expulsion and terror, and deliberate starvation and exposure to disease. And there is a growing acceptance that while sovereign Governments have the primary responsibility to protect their own citizens from such catastrophes, when they are unable or unwilling to do so that responsibility should be taken up by the wider international community...
    We endorse the emerging norm that there is a collective international responsibility to protect, exercisable by the Security Council authorizing military intervention as a last resort, in the event of genocide and other large scale killing, ethnic cleansing or serious violations of international humanitarian law which sovereign Governments have proved powerless or unwilling to prevent." 
    In September 2005, "Responsibility to Protect" "was once again enlivened", this time with the "full support of the international community". At the 60th session of the U.N. General Assembly gathering, 191 heads of state and government representatives unanimously endorsed a resolution supporting the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. This resolution laid the foundations for a new global moral compact between every State and every population on earth. As adopted, atrocity crimes “ genocide, crimes against humanity (including ethnic cleansing) and war crimes" - were considered a universal concern and therefore were responsibility of the international community.

    During the 2005 General Assembly World Summit, world leaders stated:
    Each and individual State has the responsibility to protect its populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. This responsibility entails the prevention of such crimes, including their incitement, through appropriate and necessary means. We accept that responsibility and will act in accordance with it. The international community should, as appropriate, encourage and help States to exercise this responsibility and support the United Nations in establishing an early warning capability

    The international community, through the United Nations, also has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter, to help protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. In this context, we are prepared to take collective action, in a timely and decisive manner, through the Security Council, in accordance with the Charter, including Chapter VII, on a case-by-case basis and in cooperation with relevant regional organizations as appropriate, should peaceful means be inadequate and national authorities are manifestly failing to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.
    The support of the U.S. was of course crucial for this radical new approach to international relations. The U.S. under President George Bush would not even sign up to the International Criminal Court, a key component of the proposed new order.

    Therefore the U.S. Responsibility to Protect organization re-committed itself to its  goals.  The mission of Responsibility to Protect is
    • To convince the American people and its leaders to embrace the norm of the responsibility to protect as a domestic and foreign policy priority
    • To convince our political leadership that the US must join the International Criminal Court.
    • To convince our political leadership to empower the UN and the ICC with a legitimate and effective deterrent and enforcement mechanism - an International Marshals Service - a standing international police force to arrest atrocity crimes indictees.
    Responsibility to Protect knew they would get nowhere under Bush,  but viewed the 2008 elections as an opportunity for change.
    The upcoming 2008 presidential election and the general debate that will precede provide an opportunity to bring this new norm in the public and leaders’ discourse over America’s domestic and foreign policy, and to get our nation to take the necessary bold steps that are called for to implement this bold principle.
    Clearly, the Obama Administration has proven far more sympathetic to Responsibility to Protect's agenda than was that of President Bush.

    While few seem to realize  the significance of the new doctrine, Responsibility to Protect convenor Richard H. Cooper fully understands its transformational potential.

    Cooper writes on the Responsibility to Protect   website
    Yet as I write, a quiet revolution is under way. In September 2005, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a declaration - the World Summit Outcome - whereby each and every State in the world accepted its responsibility to protect populations from genocide, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing and war crimes. The declaration also emphasizes that if a State relinquishes its responsibility to protect – whether by will or lack of capacity - this responsibility must be borne by the international community that can decide to intervene as a last resort. In the face of mass atrocities, every nation and thus every people on earth have pledged to be our brothers’ keepers. Without fanfare and with little notice, the obsolete principles underlying the Westphalian ordering of world affairs have been dramatically rewritten. We can no longer hide behind State sovereignty, a 400-years old shield, to excuse the shameful reflex and ongoing practice of remaining passive in the face of the most outrageous behaviors...
    "We can no longer hide behind state sovereignty."

    Let that sink in  reader. That is what this is all about.

    "Responsibility to Protect" means the  end of national sovereignty.  It mandates the surrender of any nation state's legal authority over their own citizenry and armed forces to a supra-national body, with the power to sanction or destroy any deemed "rogue" nation - does Israel spring  to mind?

    "Responsibility to Protect" - three little words, that should strike terror into the heart of every patriot in every free nation of the world.