Monday, May 09, 2016

Fast Islamization of Europe, with Christian Assistance

Fast Islamization of Europe, with Christian Assistance

By Julio Severo
A liberal Muslim who backs homosexual “marriage” was elected the first Islamic mayor of London, the capital of England and one of the most important cities in the West.
Sadiq Khan, the first Islamic mayor of London
Sadiq Khan, the new Muslim mayor of London, said, “This election was not without controversy and I’m so proud that Londoners have today chosen hope over fear and unity over division.”
A Muslim teaching “unity” to a nation with a Christian past and majority?
His election victory was celebrated in a multi-denominational ceremony at an Anglican cathedral accompanied by Protestant, Catholic and Jewish leaders.
G.M. Davis, a PhD from Stanford University and the author of “House of War: Islam’s Jihad Against the World,” called Khan’s victory historic in a WND (WorldNetDaily) report. And he warned about Khan’s supposedly liberal views:
“While Khan advertises himself as a liberal and eschews orthodox Islamic positions such as Shariah law, he nonetheless represents the thin end of the wedge in the mounting political presence of Islam in Europe both within and without conventional political channels. A liberal Muslim candidate will in time give way to more orthodox candidates advocating Islam and all it stands for: polygamy, brutality against women and homosexuals, repression of non-Muslim religious groups, and all the hallmarks of Shariah that have marred Islamic history through the ages.”
The 2011 census reported one in eight residents in London is a Muslim and more than a third of the city’s population was immigrant.
These numbers do not include those born to non-white or Muslim immigrants. To explain this special case, I have interviewed Professor Rodney Atkinson, a British conservative leader who has given speeches in universities and public meetings in England and throughout Europe. He has written a number of books and been an occasional adviser to ministers and MPs, since 1981. Atkinson, whose brother is actor Rowan Atkinson (the famous “Mr. Bean”), runs the conservative British website Free Nations:
He said:
The main reason why Khan won in London was demography. London is no longer a British city. The non-white “British” make up about 53% of the population of London. Khan (standing for the Labour Party that have been buying the votes of immigrants by making the rest of us pay for their mass immigration) got 57% of the vote.
First, we lost London demographically. Now we have lost it politically. Next, we will lose it culturally. Then by language.
Muslims alone make up 6% of the population (officially) [of England. But] Muslim gangs have raped, and sexually assaulted thousands of white British children in Rotherham, Oxford and other places over at least 2 decades. As one Pakistani abuser of children said to a mother of one of the girls abused: “They are white trash. That’s all they are good for.” (BBC Radio 4 Today programme 19th September 2014.)
And the former Labour Home Secretary Jack Straw said that Muslim gangs found white children “easy meat.”
Tony Blair’s government and the Labour local authorities in those areas deliberately covered up the abuse.
In 2001 a Home Office researcher in Rotherham was sent on an “ethnicity and diversity awareness course” and told that she must “never, ever” repeat her findings that child molestation on a massive scale was being perpetrated in the town and the culprits were mainly gangs of Muslim men.
Obviously one could write a book on this evil. But never in the history of the world has a country — and a political party, mainly the Labour Party — presided over the cultural and demographic destruction of their own capital city.
G.M. Davis said Western politicians can continue to ignore the immigrant issue, but such sweeping demographic changes will revolutionize politics across the European Continent.
Khan’s victory comes at a time when his Labour Party is gripped in a crisis over anti-Semitism. Several of its members have been suspended for anti-Jewish posts on social media. Former London mayor Kevin Livingstone, a fiery member of the Labour Party nicknamed “Red Ken,” was recently suspended after he alleged Adolf Hitler was a supporter of Zionism before the Holocaust.
“Islam itself is profoundly anti-Jewish,” Davis charged.
While Khan is celebrating his Islamic victory in London, in Saudi Arabia Christians have no reason to celebrate. A Christian mayor of Mecca in a ceremony at its biggest mosque? This is completely out of question. Christians and Jews are not allowed to live in Saudi Arabia.
Why choose then as the mayor of London the representative of a religious ideology championing the worldwide persecution and murder of Christians and Jews?
Conservative candidate Zac Goldsmith said that Khan and his socialist Labour Party considered Muslim terrorists their friends and would handicap police efforts to prevent another attack on London, 11 years after 52 Londoners died in suicide blasts on three subway trains and a bus committed by Muslims. Goldsmith’s appeal, accompanied by a picture of the bomb-ravaged bus, was ignored.
Defense Secretary Michael Fallon said that London’s security would be jeopardized by Khan. His warning was also ignored and even despised by the mass media.
Even Prime Minister David Cameron, a conservative with liberal stances, decried Khan’s links with Islamic extremists on the floor of the British Parliament. His warnings were ignored.
The politically correct insanity is so widespread in the English culture that even the Conservative Party is not so conservative and much less Christian. Leading Muslim activists in this party expressed anger over conservative Goldsmith, saying his attacks on Khan were “racist” and “intolerant.”
Sadiq Khan, who legally defended a 9/11 Muslim terrorist who confessed to being a member of Al Qaeda, becomes as the mayor of London one of the most powerful Muslims in the Western world.
So to choose a Muslim is to choose “unity over division,” a victory against “racism” and “intolerance”?
That union, which is non-existent in Islamic nations, has been also championed by Pope Francis, who accepted the prestigious International Charlemagne Prize for promoting European unity with Muslim immigrant invaders.
Echoing the famous “I have a dream” speech by Martin Luther King, Francis offered his vision of a Europe that welcomes Muslim immigrants.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel praised Francis for sending “very clear messages.”
The pope said the Roman Catholic Church can play a role in “the rebirth of a Europe” with a larger Muslim presence.
Before the ceremony, Francis met privately with Merkel, as well as with European parliament president Martin Schulz, a previous Charlemagne Prize recipient, EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and EU Council President Donald Tusk.
Juncker praised the pope for taking Muslim refugees to Rome with him at the end of his recent visit to Greece, making it clear that the pope gave the example for Europe to follow.
The Charlemagne Prize, consisting of a medal and a citation, is awarded annually for contributions to European unity. Previous winners include former U.S. President Bill Clinton, a notorious pro-abortion activist, and Pope John Paul II, a famous pro-life activist.
In his book “And Into The Fire: Fascist Elements in Post War Europe and the Development of the EU,” Rodney Atkinson says the Charlemagne Prize has original connections with Nazis and their efforts to unify Europe. Nazis, who were united with anti-Semite Muslims, were also anti-Semite. A Europe unified with a larger Muslim population will be a much more anti-Semitic Europe, a Nazi dreaming coming true.
Charlemagne (742-814 A.D.) was a European emperor who to keep Europe united made many wars, including against Muslims. If the pope and even Londoners were following his European unity, they would be fighting, not backing, Muslim invaders.
A true defense and unity of Europe could perhaps be accomplished by NATO, but it has been too busy fighting the fantasy of a communist Soviet Union that does not exists any longer, while multitudes of Muslims invade Europe, win the pope’s heart, get elected as mayor in one of the most important capitals in Europe and change its cultural and religious landscape.
This is the price of a pope, Europe and NATO chasing fantasies.
With pope’s blessing, Europe is under Islamization. Europe does not know what it is any longer and what it will be. But Islamic invaders know their mission, regardless if Europeans care or not.
With information from WorldNetDaily, DailyMail, Associated Press and Middle East Forum.
Portuguese version of this article: Rápida islamização da Europa, com ajuda cristã
Recommended Reading:


Unknown said...

Evidently Mooslims are as good at election fraud as Democrats.

IHateTheIlluminati said...

I found this article very recently in Y-Jesus and found it inspiring to Christianity:-

The ancient prophets had foretold that the Messiah would become God’s perfect sin offering, satisfying his justice. This perfect man would qualify to die for us. (Is. 53:6)

According to the New Testament authors, the only reason Jesus was qualified to die for the rest of us is because, as God, he lived a morally perfect life and wasn’t subject to sin’s judgment.

It’s difficult to understand how Jesus’ death paid for our sins. Perhaps a judicial analogy might clarify how Jesus solves the dilemma of God’s perfect love and justice.

Imagine entering a courtroom, guilty of murder (you have some serious issues). As you approach the bench, you realize that the judge is your father. Knowing that he loves you, you immediately begin to plead, “Dad, just let me go!”

To which he responds, “I love you, son, but I’m a judge. I can’t simply let you go.”

He is torn. Eventually he bangs the gavel down and declares you guilty. Justice cannot be compromised, at least not by a judge. But because he loves you, he steps down from the bench, takes off the robe, and offers to pay the penalty for you. And in fact, he takes your place in the electric chair.

This is the picture painted by the New Testament. God stepped down into human history, in the person of Jesus Christ, and went to the electric chair (read: cross) instead of us, for us. Jesus is not a third-party whipping boy, taking our sins, but rather he is God himself. Put more bluntly, God had two choices: to judge sin in us or to assume the punishment himself. In Christ, He chose the latter.

And Jesus made it clear that he is the only one who can bring us to God, stating, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except by me.” (John 14:6)
Notice Jesus did not include anyone else. But he did warn about false prophets!

But many argue that Jesus’ claim that he is the only way to God is too narrow, saying that there are many ways to God. Those who believe all religions are the same deny we have a sin problem. They refuse to take Christ’s words seriously. They say God’s love will accept all of us, regardless of what we have done.

Perhaps Hitler is deserving of judgement, they reason, but not them or others who live “decent lives”. It’s like saying that God grades on the curve, and everybody who gets a D- or better will get in. But this presents a dilemma.

Sin is the absolute opposite of God’s holy character. Thus we have offended the one who created us, and loved us enough to sacrifice His very Son for us. In a sense our rebellion is like spitting in His face. Neither good deeds, religion, meditation, or Karma can pay the debt our sins have incurred.

According to theologian R. C. Sproul, Jesus alone is the one who can pay that debt. He writes:

“The claim of resurrection is vital to Christianity. If Christ has been raised from the dead by God, then He has the credentials and certification that no other religious leader possesses.”³