When is censorship justified? When is censorship not justified?

Pornography:

Censoring some pornography is justified, though we do need some common sense.  Of course anything that shows children being molested, cruelty to animals, or anything that shows coercion being used, should not be shown.

On the other hand, I see nothing wrong with showing the naked body, and I see nothing wrong with showing mutual, loving sex.  With some films, it is an intrinsic part of the story.

And the nude body?  A normal part of art classes, though some of the bodies drawn in art classes are not exactly designed to titillate.

Incitement to violence:

Now that is one thing that should be censored.  But the censors must realize they should not be too broad in their definitions.  Criticism of the behaviour of a group of people is not the same as telling others to attack them.  And when someone is only speaking facts, now that should never be censored.  How can a problem ever be tackled when no-one is willing to talk about it?

Drunkenness, crime, violence and child rape in remote Aboriginal communities is one such problem.  It is a terrible problem. Far too many Aboriginal kids commit suicide.  A great deal of money is spent trying to tackle it, but nearly always, it misses the mark.  How can money be well spent when no-one dares say what is happening?  If a person does dare, then they are accused of 'racism.'

Jacinta Nampijinpa Price is a lady unafraid to speak about it.  She is hoping for election to parliament in May (2019)  and might then have a little more power to do something about it.  Being Aboriginal herself, is some protection against the far-too-effective insult of 'racist.'   But all the same, Price is very unpopular in certain quarters.  She has had death threats.


'Hate speech.' 

A dictionary definition: (Merriam-Webster dictionary)
Legal Definition of hate speech : speech that is intended to insult, offend, or intimidate a person because of some trait (as race, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, or disability)

In many countries, there are penalties in law for 'hate speech.'  The problem is that people are defining hate speech more and more loosely until real problems cannot be spoken of, because someone else will call it 'racism' or 'hate speech.'

But speaking fact is never hate speech.

And there should be NO censoring of opinion simply because the authorities (or the censor) disagrees with what the person says, or does not like the facts that he airs.

Several commentators are facing censorship.

Alex Jones is one who has been removed from social media. His 'Infowars' has been wiped from social media platforms. I found him interesting for a while, for his conspiracy theories, some of them quite absurd, others I judged as possible.

 But maybe one of his theories had too much truth for someone's liking, and he has lost his platform.

Another is 'Proud Boys.' I have never seen anything about this group, so looked them up. They say about themselves, "The Proud Boys confuse the media because the group is anti-SJW without being alt-right. "Western chauvinist" includes all races, religions, and sexual preferences." 
(SJW means 'social justice warrior.') 

On the other hand, Wikipedia says they are "a far-right neo-fascist organization that admits only men as members and promotes political violence. It is based in the United States and has a presence in Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom." 

But I take that with a grain of salt, as the media has a record of calling anyone 'far right' who are not deeply Leftist.

Milo Yiannopoulos

Milo Yiannopoulos has been banned from some platforms, and he was not allowed a visa for a planned speaking tour of Australia. (April, 2019)
 He wrote a book, had a publisher, but the publisher decided to drop him, so he had to self publish.

Some commentators have been 'shadow-banned,' which means that their posts reach only a small audience. It is underhanded, as the commentator does not know he is being censored.

Even ordinary people, like myself, run the risk of being accused of 'violating the standards' of facebook if we dare to talk of unpopular subjects.  With the increasing censorship, facebook is already becoming less relevant.  It may soon go the way of 'Myspace.'   But right now, because so many people use it, one can still learn things that are happening across the world, things that print and TV media will consider either not newsworthy, or the 'wrong' message.  

Censorship by 'shouting down.'

It has become a standard tactic now to 'shout down' speakers whose views other people do not wish to hear.

Bettina Arndt was shouted down when she tried to demonstrate that the story of a 'rape culture' in colleges was actually nonsense.






Censorship by the threat of job loss:

A basic teaching of Christianity is that good people go to heaven and bad people go to hell. Also that if one accepts Jesus Christ as your saviour, and you 'repent,' then you are saved from hell.

Israel Folau is a Rugby player, but also, he is one of those Christians who firmly believes in this teaching, would prefer that others not go to hell, so he tells them to look to Jesus.

So he posts a meme on Twitter:

"WARNING Drunks Homosexuals Adulterers Liars Fornicators Thieves Atheists Idolaters, HELL AWAITS YOU. REPENT! ONLY JESUS SAVES." 

In other words, he repeats Christian teaching.
For that, his sporting contract, supposed to be worth $4 million, has been terminated, though he does have one more day to appeal the decision, (as at 17/4/19.)   Maybe he will sue - discriminination on the basis of religion.) 


Dr. Peter Ridd called for better quality control of science reports. He said that 'peer-reviewed' papers are not necessarily any more than friends approving what friends say. This man is a scientist and it is his own area of expertise. He lost his job.
(https://davepellowe.com/dr-peter-ridd-on-academic-freedom-the-great-barrier-reef/)

He took it to court, and on the 16th April, 2019: a court ruled that his loss of job was 'unlawful.' But I cannot imagine that he will be very comfortable in that work environment (James Cook University) if he goes back.

Climate Scientists are at real risk of losing their jobs if they don't play along with their colleagues in the 97% Consensus pretence.

Censorship by the threat of legal action:

The notorious 18c  is still in force in Australia.

Explanation:  Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975, deals with offensive behaviour "because of race, colour or national or ethnic origin" in Australia. It is a section of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.

This awful law provides for the punishment of anyone who 'offends' someone else, and whether it is 'offence' rests with the accuser.  It has been used to severely punish those accused. Even if the accused person is eventually cleared, it is liable they have been broken financially and emotionally.  It is a very effective punishment, whether or not there is any actual crime.

Other countries now punish blasphemy, usually using the laws against what they call 'hate speech.' (http://prophecynewswatch.com/article.cfm?recent_news_id=2677

Australia may do that as well, quite soon.  Labor speaks of adding 'religion' to the Racial Vilification laws.

And one dare not question whether a man is a woman merely because he takes hormones and declares he is a woman. In Canada,  a chap called Bill Whatcott, was fined $55,000 for just that.

 (https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/court-orders-christian-to-pay-55000-to-trans-politician-for-calling-him-biological-male) 

Censorship by exclusion: 

Germaine Greer

This one is most noticeable when a speaker is 'disinvited'  as Germaine Greer was disinvited from a Festival of Writers. That was a couple of years ago.

More recently, comedian Barry Humphies was disinvited from a Comedy Festival, and the 'Barry Award' named after him, discontinued.

Bjorn Lomborg is a scientist who has run afoul of conventional climate theory, not by disputing it, but merely by saying that we need to look at better ways of treating the threat than by wrecking the economy.  He has lost speaking engagements and has been excluded from discussion.

Many more, of course, are not invited to events in the first place.  When a person is excluded and ignored if they dare to mention unpopular views, in whatever context, most will simply keep quiet.  Maybe it is part of the reason that some elections have had unexpected results in past years, like Brexit and like the election of Donald Trump to the American Presidency. People may have learned to keep their mouths shut,  but they can still vote the way they choose.  (Long live the Secret Ballot.)  


One man who has been 'unpersoned' for speaking unpalatable facts is Tommy Robinson. 

Even to say his name is liable to evoke a bitter, spitting hatred from those who oppose him.  The authorities are trying very hard to silence him, and he has been removed from facebook, from Instagram, from Twitter, and from You-tube.  The videos he has made are disappearing, which is why I have included links to several here.  (They may have gone before you try and find them, of course.)

One of the earliest of his videos that I saw (now gone from my facebook page) is a lengthy one he made relatively early in his career.  It was the video of a speech he made, and it was about an hour long.  In it, he spoke of the way his London suburb of Luton had been harmed by the influx of Muslim immigrants, though not by earlier immigrants of various races and nationalities.  He speaks of some of the original residents being intimidated into leaving, so the area became more and more filled with Muslim immigrants.  He speaks of a Veterans' March being harassed by Muslims, and the way that Jihadis were recruited in his own neighbourhood.

He speaks of Muslim 'grooming gangs'  using non-Muslim girls for sex.  He told of  two fathers trying to get the police to rescue their daughters from the flat where they were being abused.  One of the girls was just eleven.  But instead of doing anything to rescue the girls, the fathers were threatened with being in 'breach of the peace' or some such thing. That was years before the problem of grooming gangs was acknowledged and some of the culprits finally brought to justice.


It includes a short video of a march of a large number of Muslims chanting 'UK, go to Hell,' and 'British Police, burn in Hell.' And yet,  it is Robinson who is harassed by the police and by the British Establishment.

This is that video: I suggest you watch and listen while you can.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YQ94jFg_4A

That he criticized the police and that he speaks of the protection that these gangs had, has probably contributed to the way that the police and others in authority have tried to bully him into silence.


Robinson is speaking from experience.  He is speaking of what he has seen and heard. He saw those recruiting for Islamic Jihad. A portion is shown on his video.

 He speaks of a Muslim terrorist who blew himself up - 'He lived three doors down from my auntie.'  He speaks of a girl who went to school with him.  'Now she wears a burqa.'

Robinson has, indeed, broken the law on occasion. He is not a saint. But I think he might be a bit of a hero.  So few have dared to speak of the problems that large-scale immigration brings with it, especially when there is such a large cohort of immigrants that stick together, and do not adhere to the norms usually regarded as civilized behaviour.

He is, in no way, a racist. Colour and race is not an issue for him.  What he is definite about is that those who live in Britain should adhere to its laws.

He says: "THE LENGTH IN WHICH THE ESTABLISHMENT ARE GOING TO TRY AND COMPLETELY SILENCE ME IS BOTH PHENOMENAL AND SCARY, NOT JUST FOR ME BUT FOR THE NATION AS A WHOLE. THIS IS NOT JUST AN ATTACK ON ME, THIS IS A TACTFUL ATTEMPT AT SILENCING THE HUGE MAJORITY OF THOSE WHOSE VOICES I REPRESENT."


His final removal from You-Tube as well as all of the others might have been prompted by the video he called ‘Panodrama.’ It was an expose of how the BBC had tried to undermine him - 'Tommy Takedown' was its working title.  It is all on tape.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnBRlL6_Eg0&fbclid=IwAR0wztiKl7Tv4s34vw7OSsI03dobi220hJDNhdhIW0nSzmvlzhSPZRPQsZw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dU7uSABbaM&fbclid=IwAR1sIuJfAOBnrfxDha0loIebDMKsC6Wm0QY2xan5RZZXumo9bRQ3-Qkq75Y ‘Panodrama’

I had a link to the original video, but that has gone from my f/b page. Maybe the above videos are still around because they only show the video on a large screen and the crowd watching closely. Robinson has a very large number of supporters.

Other videos I had on my facebook page have also been removed. It is why I have made this blog post. People should not be silenced when all they do is expose the facts. It is criminal what they have done to silence and to punish this man.

Tommy Robinson has been 'depersoned' as much as the authorities have been able. He has been imprisoned on feeble grounds. His family's address has been publicized, in spite of the full knowledge that it would put them in danger.   One day, he may very probably be killed by Muslim criminals, maybe in a prison when he next 'breaches the peace.'


He says that most people judge on headlines, and he asks that people look further, beyond the headlines.

Some of his videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnBRlL6_Eg0&fbclid=IwAR2Zg62yFlVG35GZCydajWUl_EaC6A5BOtHq7ieOTlQBXyNTeo-Ot93ktqY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dU7uSABbaM&fbclid=IwAR1n2MEx-0xN-5O8YgjIT_QLr8K5u8egzs158OSw-wYA6it7YQU6lZ5DJRo

https://www.tr.news/over-5000-join-tommy-robinson-on-telegram-overnight/?fbclid=IwAR0GQwlY8kjS8WEeykvu0gynimhukRiAXaSGDDo8GaZIBIzStxR9uS5vUEM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnBRlL6_Eg0&fbclid=IwAR3ItwafERN3korEvOj-fphzIsBAAtc3fs23TJ7cqXCsqOb5Z-oBLGgMmAg

https://www.facebook.com/johan.vrie.39/videos/412190799599006/UzpfSTYzMTk4NjE4NjpWSzoyMjYyNzczMDU3MzI5NjI3/?multi_permalinks=2262865960653670%2C2262773057329627%2C2261678980772368&notif_id=1555016417417126&notif_t=group_activity



Being interviewed on his bans.

https://www.facebook.com/johan.vrie.39/videos/412190799599006/UzpfSTYzMTk4NjE4NjpWSzoyMjYyNzczMDU3MzI5NjI3/?multi_permalinks=2263859657220967%2C2262865960653670%2C2262773057329627%2C2261678980772368&notif_id=1555016417417126&notif_t=group_activity


About the bans, this one by Avi Yemini 5th April 2019

https://www.facebook.com/sargonofakkad100/videos/547378355793798/UzpfSTYzMTk4NjE4NjpWSzoyMjU3OTg5NTI0NDc0NjQ3/

https://www.tr.news/breaking-tommy-robinson-banned-from-snapchat/?fbclid=IwAR14VTkUa3-WNjjIg1cTER83JF5qor_RYZvUvEK7K3HlVQPml6bqaxVXPOU


20th April, 2019,   Robinson says in an email sent to those on his mailing list:
"So I have been completely censored, de-platformed and pretty much erased from the face of the online earth by the establishment, the giant corporations and the so called 'powers that be'. Sadly things have got to such a level now that the general public and any innocent folk who even dare to simply just mention my name are now being penalised and met with a level of censorship which is no different to that of a communist dictatorship!!

This is absolutely insane and scary at the same time. The threat is absolutely real and is clearer now for everyone to see than it has ever been before. Even for those individuals who hate me with a passion it has become excruciatingly painful for them to now even remotely agree with me on what is happening and the ultimate effect that this level of censorship is having both now and in the future."

Some censorship is justified.  But the censorship of those who are only trying to tell us what is happening in the world is not only unjustified, it is criminal.  

Threat? What threat?

In 1996, two British nurses living in Saudi Arabia were convicted of the murder of a fellow nurse, Yvonne Gilford. Like most foreign workers, they lived within a gated, 'secure' Compound. To most observers, their guilt was doubtful, and there was talk of a Saudi security guard seen in the area where the nurses had their rooms.  

The women's motive was supposedly something to do with a passionate lesbian love affair. To most of us, the idea that middle-aged women might murder for passion seems so unlikely as to be ludicrous.  (Gilford was fifty-nine.)  But the Saudi religion is Islam, and Islam has a very odd idea of female sexuality.  

Another possible motive was theft, and one of the nurses supposedly used the credit card of the victim.  

The murderers confessed (under coercion,) were sentenced, one to death by beheading, but both were later returned to Britain. 

Most of the world thought they'd been framed.    

But whether they were guilty or not is not what I wanted to talk about. Some years afterward, I worked with another medical professional, who had lived and worked in the same facility at the same time, and she told me that 'all of them there' were convinced that the accused nurses were undoubtedly guilty, and in a 'wise' sort of a voice, she told me that people will do anything for money.

But what I think is that it would have been too threatening a thought that anyone could be at risk of being framed for murder while in a country with such a different justice system, and far prefer to think that the two were guilty.  They felt safer that way. A lot safer. 

Tommy Robinson

It is akin to the reaction to the punishment of those who fall foul of the authorities because they speak too much truth.  

Tommy Robinson had been harassed for years because he spoke of the damage that the booming numbers of Muslim immigrants were doing to his home suburb of Luton, (London) and to make it worse, he spoke loudly about the Pakistani Muslim rape gangs (usually referred to as 'grooming gangs')  that were ignored for decades by the police.  

He is now in prison on what appears to most of the world to be a remarkably feeble pretext.  



But many, maybe most, people are saying that he knew he was doing the wrong thing and deserved to be locked up. It does not make one feel safe to think that the police and your government might imprison a person for too much truth-telling.  It does not make one feel safe to think that your formerly free and democratic nation is quickly turning into a totalitarian police state. 

We are like the three monkeys when we choose not to see what is happening. 

But it is vital we do see, before our freedom is gone. 

To quote Adolf Hitler - 'The best way to take control of a people and control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed."

The edging toward the loss of free speech is happening in many places.  It is happening through persuasion, through 'education' especially at universities, and it is happening through coercion.  Occasionally, I still see someone say that being 'politically correct' is merely to do with politeness.  But it is far more than that.

When we cannot address the lunacy of having men who claim they are women competing in women's sport at a professional level without being accused of 'transphobia,' when we cannot speak of the ill effects of mass immigration without being accused of being 'racist,' and when we cannot talk of the threat posed by Islamic terrorism without being 'Islamophobic,' then we have lost our free speech.  

For the moment, in most places, criticism is as far as it goes, though even that is enough to  bring most of us into line.  But more and more countries are making 'hate speech' a crime punishable by a prison term. Oddly, this is not being used to control a Muslim imam calling for violence toward infidels, instead it is being used to silence those who criticise those Muslim imams who are calling for violence toward infidels.  

We are well on the way to losing our rights and freedoms, just as Hitler described. 

We must wake up, look around, read those articles many prefer to avoid, do not take as gospel the politically correct waffle you see on the ABC and like media, and start to reassert our rights.  Only if we use our rights will we manage to retain them.  I don't think it is too late.

Treachery from Within

The quote below is attributed to Marcus Tullius Cicero.  From Google, Cicero was 'a Roman philosopher, statesman, lawyer, political theorist, and Roman constitutionalist. Cicero is widely considered one of Rome's greatest orators and prose stylists.'

'A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor, he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.'

I have seen this quoted several times recently, and that is because Western countries are now faced with 'the enemy within.'   Those admitted, often accepted as refugees, have taken their place in our home countries.  Many became useful citizens, but many others have never accepted that the values of their old homes should be forgotten,  even when those values were what made their old homes an unsafe place to be.  So now we see crimes we seldom saw before, and we see other people's agenda being pushed even from within our own government.


We MUST NOT have anyone whose values conflict with those of Australia representing us in parliament, Federal or State, or even in for local councils.

So who should be permitted to represent us in government?  

1. They must be an Australian citizen.  There can be no dual citizens permitted.  They must be Australian and Australian only.  Australian citizenship should not be easily granted. 

2. We cannot have in parliament any individual who believes in an ideology whose 'holy' books advocate what to us are crimes - from the beating of wives to the killing of 'infidels.' That would mean that no believing Muslim could represent Australia.

3. Every single person who represents us in local, state or federal government should be, not only an Australian citizen, but Australian born. This will not eradicate the possibility of treachery from within, but it will reduce it.  Some will act against Australian interests because of ideology, and some, sadly, will take bribes. 


Australian Citizenship.

1. Instead of four years permanent residency, there should be a requirement of fifteen years of residence and productivity.  That means not on welfare. 

2. There should have been no trouble from the applicant more than one or two parking tickets. There is theoretically a 'good character' requirement in place at the moment, but it is absurdly lenient.

3. Citizenship should not be granted to anyone merely because they are born in Australia. 

4.Citizenship should not be granted merely because one marries an Australian citizen. It is a privilege, not a right.



Who should be permitted to vote?

1. They must be an Australian citizen.

2. They must not be in prison.

3. If a person has committed an offence with a penalty of more than one year's imprisonment, they should permanently lose their right to vote. 

4. They should be aged eighteen or over.

5. Anyone who has been out of the country for more than five years should not be permitted to vote. They would be insufficiently familiar with the issues, and some expatriates would be feeling a geater loyalty to the country they live in rather than the country they have left behind.  


A lot of people will be thinking that all of this is absurd, maybe xenophobic, maybe 'racist,' certainly 'Islamophobic.'  It is not.  It is defence of our own country and our own way of life.

Treachery is happening.  It is treachery from within.



Local Councils:

At the moment, there are different and more lenient rules to run for election to local councils. They were devised when local councils understood their responsibility was to do with local development, garbage collection, the upkeep of roads, and so on.  But in recent years, they have become more political, and sometimes, treacherous.  

1. Australia Day/ Anzac Day.  Several local councils, mostly Sydney ones,  are attacking Australia Day as 'divisive.'  Some have stopped having naturalisation ceremonies on that day.  (Naturalisation means granting Australian citizenship.)  To attack Australia Day is to attack Australian values.  Anzac Day, likewise. 

2. Political Activism:  Councils collect rates to pay for their responsibilities. It is wrong to use these rates to pay for political campaigns.  An example is Sydney Council  spending $110,000 on the yes side of the campaign for same-sex marriage. That was late 2017.   
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-01/city-of-sydney-flies-vote-yes-flags/8862472

That was an abuse of their power, but it was not really treacherous. This one could certainly be regarded as treacherous, that a council has sent ratepayers' money to Gaza.  Gaza is ruled by Hamas, which is a terrorist organisation.   Some councils advocate a boycott of Israel. 
https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/canterbury-bankstown-council-sends-ratepayer-money-to-international-conflict/news-story/649e0e69c5d78dce9cab78f2c171855f

3. Development not in the interests of the rate-payers.  
There are many countries who are happy to invest in Australia, and there are some members of councils eager to reap rewards by accommodating them. Some, no doubt, are influenced by bribes, (maybe called 'donations,')  but a Chinese-Australian, for instance, might be happy to swing a vote toward China's interests rather than Australia's interests.  Others might be influenced by idealism, maybe that he feels that the idea of a country that acts only in its own interests is no longer in line with his 'progressive' values. 


State Government:

The same arguments apply to State Governments, especially in regard to problematic development by overseas firms.  It is a shame to see so much of our Australian farmland handed over to overseas interests, whether it is China or India.



Federal Government: 

It is federal government where the capacity for treachery is greatest.  In the past, treachery from within was more rare, simply because people were so much less mobile. Times have changed, and we must protect ourselves.  Otherwise, we could see our own country stolen away from us by traitors from within.

Threat 1 - Commercial Interests

A Chinese-Australian billionaire has been named as someone who bribed a UN official, and is also active in 'donating' to political parties and to universities with the motive of swaying decisions in favour of China. 
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/22/chinese-australian-billionaire-involved-in-un-bribery-case-mp-claims

Penny Wong

There are ministers who are adamant that to try and protect ourselves against foreign ownership of Australian land is somehow 'xenophobic.' 

For example, Labor minister Penny Wong wants to make it easier for foreign investors to buy our farms.  We have fought to protect our country from foreign invaders, and now we are going to simply sell it?  How utterly short-sighted!  

Penny Wong is Malaysian-born.  She is the Senate Shadow Minister for Trade and Investment.  

 https://www.pennywong.com.au/transcripts/abc-radio-national-breakfast-3/

Threat 2 - Political Leverage

 China has been accused of trying to influence Australian politics, and has definitely been doing its best to influence what is taught in universities. Their preferred map, for instance, does not show Taiwan as a separate country.  An Australian senator, Sam Dastyari, (no longer a senator)  was accused of allowing China to influence him. Bribes are alleged. Dastyari was not Australian-born, but whether that was an influence in his flawed loyalties is impossible to say. 

Saudi Arabia donates a great deal of money to Australian universities, though how much influence they manage is debatable.  It is safe to say that little would be taught that criticised the country, and not a thing that criticised its religion. 

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/dastyari-and-chinese-government-influence-australia
http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/tensions-rise-as-chinese-governments-influence-infiltrates-aussie-universities/news-story/e7768b0bb1f5953a7608884527387372

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/archived/religionreport/saudi-money-australian-universities-and-islam--/3255562

Threat 3 - The 'New World Order.'

 The 'New World Order'  is basically the eradication of borders, the promotion of mass immigration, and the moving toward a single world government. European countries that have relinquished control of some of their powers to the EU is an example. The EU started as a mere 'Common Market.' It has gone a long way further than that now. 

The United Nation has also garnered powers that nation-states have given up. Each time Australia signs a UN agreement, we have less power to decide Australian matters in Australia's interests and no-one else's.  

 Some say there is no such push, others say it is a worldwide conspiracy by the most powerful men in the world.  

http://constitution.org/col/cuddy_nwo.htm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs-882eP0ag              
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2R2XbDbzwPg


Whichever is true, there is no denying that some very influential people appear to want us to drop borders and accept an unlimited number of immigrants - 'globalism.'  Look, for instance, at the amazing hostility to Donald Trump's desire to stop people and contraband flowing in from Mexico.    
Not many ordinary workers like the idea of globalism. Donald Trump's rejection of it was probably one of the main reasons that he was elected US President.  

  

Image taken from the Brexit campaign

Some European countries are fighting back against the imposition by the EU of the acceptance of enormous numbers of immigrants - Poland, for instance.  Other countries are increasingly veering toward what those in power and the media refer to contemptuously as 'far-right' or 'populist' parties.  Italy is one. Maybe in Europe, the pendulum has begun to swing against the suicidal open borders policy.  A recently published books speaks about it -  'The Strange Death of Europe' by Douglas Murray.   

Europe has been betrayed by those in power, and by those working against it from within. 

Threat 4 - Islamisation

In more and more countries, blasphemy laws are being enacted. In practice, what is meant is that criticism of Islam is termed 'hate speech,' and those who commit this 'crime' can be punished.

Sweden: 

There have been so many new immigrants surging into Sweden, immigrants from the sort of third world country that view women as chattels to be used as desired, that it is now known as 'the rape capital of Europe.'  Women are advised not to go out at night.

Police must not 'racially profile' suspects, and statistics are deliberately noncommittal about country of origin of criminals.

It recently came to light that school children were being taught Islam.

People who speak out about the high level of immigration and the dangers of Islam are liable for arrest for 'hate speech.'  Islam has strong laws against 'blasphemy.' It amazes me that a civilised nation pays attention to blasphemy laws, but it seems they do - only against Islam, of course. One can say what you like about Christians.

The Swedes are losing Sweden.There are forecasts that ethnic Swedes will become a minority in their own country within a couple of decades.

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/03/sweden-police-to-focus-on-combating-hate-speech
http://www.cvikas.com/2018/05/22/civil-war-erupts-in-sweden-as-86868/


France

In France, they have been in a state of emergency for years. Terrorist attacks are frequent, the latest (at the time of writing) in Marseilles. (May 21st, 2018)

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/two-women-killed-in-suspected-terrorist-attack-in-marseilles-1.3240030



Germany

Germany now has to defend itself against Islamic terrorist attacks including 'rape jihad' such as the infamous attacks in Cologne, New Year's Eve, 2016. There are  'No Go Zones' and the culture has changed. It is very sad.  See the interview below.

https://www.facebook.com/AutumnbreezeMovies/videos/10156121425611223/UzpfSTE1MDgwMjEyODk0NjcwODY6MjA4Mzc1ODc1NTIyNjY2Nw/

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/cologne-attacks-trigger-raw-debate-on-immigration-in-germany-a-1071175.html

https://www.facebook.com/BritainBitesBack/videos/355775868271331/UzpfSTEwMDAwMjg4NjgyODk3MjoxNDcxNjE0MjgyOTQ0Nzg1/


Britain:

London bus with 'Allah is great' on the side.

London police are trying to cope with surging knife crime, a lot of it by recent immigrants. They have a Muslim Lord Mayor and a Muslim Home Secretary.  They have a sign 'Allah is great' on London buses. There are the scandalous 'grooming gangs' or 'rape gangs,' especially targeting underage girls.  The culprits were Muslim, the girls not Muslim.  As the girls were 'infidels,' the abuse is not even wrong according to Islamic law. 

And yet the police appear to be more active in persecuting those who criticise Islam than they are in  the perpetrators or even in those Muslim imams who preach terrorism.

May 25th, 2018, Tommy Robinson was arrested and imprisoned for reporting on a trial of those involved in 'grooming gangs.'

Since the arrest was shown live, and since he did not appear to have been doing anything at all that was 'disturbing the peace,' there is outrage, with many talking of a police state, and others saying he was a racist and got what he deserved.

Left a bacon sandwich,
ended up dead. 

If this man is imprisoned with Muslims, he may very likely not survive.  He was brutally bashed on a previous occasion while in prison. 

There was another who criticised Islam by leaving a bacon sandwich outside a mosque.  He was arrested and sentenced to a year in prison.  For a couple of bacon sandwiches and a sign or two saying 'No Mosques.' He was killed by other inmates. That was also in Britain.  2016.






http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4075328/Man-jailed-leaving-bacon-sandwiched-outside-mosque-dead-prison-half-way-12-month-sentence.html
https://www.facebook.com/OzraeliAvi/videos/931030387021435/UzpfSTMxODcxMTI1ODUyMTA1Mzo2NTY2ODk2MDgwNTY1NDg/
https://www.facebook.com/BritainBitesBack/photos/a.292147614634157.1073741829.292022501313335/404836693365248/?type=3&theater
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-22617339
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11057647/Rotherham-sex-abuse-scandal-1400-children-exploited-by-Asian-gangs-while-authorities-turned-a-blind-eye.html


The Tommy Robinson arrest prompted this article by Bruce Bawer,  written May 26, 2018 

In the 'European Appeasement Olympics,' Britain wins. 

"All right, the competition is over. Britain wins.  For years I thought that Britain's long tradition of open debate and individual liberty would enable it to stand up more firmly to the encroachments of Islam than other Western European countries.

"But I was wrong. It is Britain that is falling fastest to Islam. It is Britain, our mother country, home of the Magna Carta, that is most firmly betraying its own history and values.' 

The above are short extracts.  It is worth reading the full article -

 https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12375/in-the-european-appeasement-olympics-who-wins

The Western World generally:

Some Muslims have bigger ambitions than raping white girls and maybe killing a few infidels.  As the Koran advocates, they feel that the whole world should worship Allah and submit to Islamic law.  Canada, for example. The video below is a Toronto imam explaining why and how Islam will take over in Canada.  With Prime Minister Trudeau apparently bent on placating all things Muslim, they are off to an excellent start. 

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/trudeau-isis-fighters-returning-canada-can-powerful-voice-preventing-radicalization/
http://news.acdemocracy.org/toronto-imam-explains-how-canada-will-gradually-be-transformed-into-an-islamic-state/

https://www.facebook.com/worldnewsfox/videos/vb.605151956348622/707410959456054/?type=2&theater
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4fGa6GBx5g&feature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjpcp4gESsU
https://www.facebook.com/OriginalPOAtv/videos/609783209387609/UzpfSTEwMDAxMzA0NTIzNjY0ODo0NDI1ODgwNzI4NTI2OTc/

The ambition is to impose Islam and Sharia (Islamic Law)  on their adopted countries.  No doubt many of the flood of new immigrants into Europe and other Western countries are merely trying to make themselves a new life with productive work.  There are others who are actively trying to choose the country with the most generous social security system.  But there are also those whose ambition it is to have the ummah  cover the whole world and are working toward that goal. The numbers of Muslim immigrants and the fact that they have much bigger families means that the countries will be changed anyway, with or without intent.  (ummah - the Islamic community)  

Most Muslims, luckily, do not support what are generally called extremists, but are more accurately called 'purists' in that they try to follow the instructions of the 'holy' books and the warlike example of Muhammad. 

Below is the link to a video showing radical Muslims being challenged by moderates.

https://www.facebook.com/Channel4News/videos/10153464748691939/UzpfSTY2MjI5MzE5Mzg6Vks6MTAxNTM0NjQ3NDg2OTE5Mzk/

The more that Muslims oppose the extremists, the better for all of us. If only Islam could be reformed to keep only the peaceful aspects, those aspects in keeping with Western law and Western civilization, no-one would have an issue with it, or at least, no more than with any other religion. But since Islam forbids questioning, and asserts its Koran as the final word, that is difficult. And the Sharia punishment for leaving Islam, 'apostasy,'  is death. 

In Australia, there are  many examples of betrayals by those we have taken in, some major, as in jihadist killings by immigrants, often those who have been granted citizenship, others apparently more minor - such as special women only slots at public swimming pools. 

This is Islamisation.  We are witnessing it.  Many of us don't like it one little bit. 


Can countries be lost to Islamisation?  

Of course they can.  Historically, it has happened time and again. Islam was not spread by peaceful means. Muhammad tried that in Mecca, but it didn't work very well, and after he moved from Mecca to Medina,  the ideology of Islam turned to conquest by any means necessary. 

Look at Lebanon.  This was a state that used to be Christian/secular and is now firmly Islamic.  Brigitte Gabriel said: ‘We had open borders and welcomed everyone.  Today, I fight every day to warn my new country, America, to not make the same mistakes.’ 

http://conspiracyfiles.uk/other_files/we-had-open-borders-lebanese-womans-chilling-warning-to-america/

Erdogan

Islamic countries are becoming more strictly Islamic day by day.  The Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan,  recently made a call to all Muslims, everywhere, to join in the fight against Jews.  (Jews being 'dogs,' of course, and deserving only of death according to the Koran and Islamic teaching.) 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/erdogan-lashes-racist-israel-calls-for-muslims-to-flood-temple-mount/

Indonesia, Egypt, Malaysia, all are becoming more sternly Islamic. Women are feeling more pressure to veil, and in Indonesia, it was declared 'blasphemy' when a Christian candidate said that the Koran did not say that a Muslim had to vote only for a Muslim.  (The Koran doesn't mention voting at all, of course.)  But nevertheless, Ahok is now in prison with a sentence of two years for blasphemy.  And what that means is that Muslims will understand it to be sinful to vote for any other than a Muslim.  It is undoubtedly a factor in the rapid rise of Muslims in powerful positions in politics. In this case, democracy is working against us. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/09/jakarta-governor-ahok-found-guilty-of-blasphemy-jailed-for-two-years

There are problems when we allow our parliamentary democracy to be undermined by those who are traitors to Australian interests. 

It is time for us to discriminate.  Discrimination is not a bad thing.  We need to discriminate against criminals and we need to discriminate against traitors. 'Multiculturalism' is only successful when the cultures are not too far apart -  Danish, Swedish, Italian, Greek -  these have all integrated successfully.  Later immigrants have not.  

We need to be far more fussy whom we allow into Australia, and far, far more fussy about whom we allow the privilege of citizenship.  As for government, we have to exclude all of those with conflicting loyalties.  We can be fussy if we choose.  It is not 'racist,'  or 'xenophobic' or any of the other adjectives used to stop argument and promote someone else's agenda.  There is no reason why we cannot keep Australia as a  civilised Western nation if we choose.  We only have to choose.