Tag Archives: Austrians

IS A MUSLIM BAN DISCRIMINATORY?

abe-lincoln-slaves

The fuss over the executive order relating to Muslims entering the US once again highlights just how ignorant most people are of history.   This is especially true of the left, who keep on repeating the mantra that discrimination is un-American.

Perhaps they have never heard of slavery, or maybe they just want to forget it as the Democrats were the party of slavery.

Anyway, discrimination has been common in American history, going right back to the first settlements in Jamestown and Massachusetts Bay.   Both colonies were founded by WASPs, for WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants).   The location of Jamestown was chosen to hide from Catholics intent on kidnapping Protestants.   At the time of independence from Great Britain, the thirteen colonies were 98% Protestant, 1% Catholic and 1% “Other,”  including Jews.

In 1857, the Supreme Court ruled that African-Americans could not be American citizens.   Again, remember, by this time the Republicans were campaigning for the end of slavery, while the Democrats were in support; this blatantly racist decision was made by a Court that was siding with the Democrats.   Right up until the 1964 Voting Rights Act, Democratic politicians in the South deprived blacks of the vote; while the whites voted for the Democrats as the party that supported the Old (pro-slavery) South.

In 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed by Congress.   The law was against ethnic Chinese, as even Chinese from British territories were not allowed.   The Act was renewed in 1892.

Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has self-righteously announced that Canada will take in refugees America doesn’t want. Canada is another country going soft, also wallowing in ignorance of history.   His predecessor, Stephen Harper, apologized in 2006 for the 1923 Act of the Canadian parliament that banned Chinese immigration. Australia had a “White Australia” policy before 1972. Muslim countries routinely discriminate – it’s impossible for whites to settle in their countries and become citizens.   The same is true of most African countries.

As the first mosque was opened in the US in 1929, there were clearly few if any Muslim immigrants before that date.   Non-white immigration was strictly limited before the 1965 Immigration Act, which literally changed the face of America.

It should be remembered that in 1942, a Democratic president, Franklin D. Roosevelt, issued Proclamation No. 2537 “requiring aliens from World War II-enemy countries–Italy, Germany and Japan to register with the United States Department of Justice. Registered persons were then issued a Certificate of Identification for Aliens of Enemy Nationality.   A follow-up to the Alien Registration Act of 1940, Proclamation No. 2537 facilitated the beginning of full-scale internment of Japanese Americans the following month.”  (History magazine)

More recently, President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, banned Iranians (Muslims) from entering the US during the 1979-80 hostage crisis.

So, clearly, it is possible for the US president (and even Canadian and Australian governments) to put an end to Islamic immigration, if they want to.

And what about Europe?

A Muslim army tried to conquer Europe in the eighth century.   It was defeated in 732 at the gates of Paris, by the grandfather of the future Emperor Charlemagne.

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Muslim armies tried to take Vienna, at the heart of Europe.   They were defeated by Catholic armies.

There is no record of Austrians demonstrating to let them in!   That had to wait until 21st century liberalism, where half the population is besotted with ignorance of both history and comparative religion. The Catholics of 1683 knew that Islam was a pagan religion – they were terrified the Muslims might win and take over, ending their way of life.   Not so today’s churches who are more inclined to welcome immigrants and refugees.   Even the pope took in a family or two at the Vatican and has said that the building of walls is unchristian – it was walls in the Middle Ages that kept the pagans out, enabling citizens to stay safe.   It was Roman Catholics who built those walls.

In 1095, Pope Urban II called on the nations of Western Europe to launch a “Crusade” against Muslims who were killing and harassing Christians on pilgrimages to the Holy Land.   He called for Christian forces to retake the Holy Land.   Again, there were no demonstrations in the streets in support of Muslims – everybody knew the horror stories from the Middle East.   It’s true that Christians perpetrated horrendous acts against Muslims during the two centuries of the crusades, illustrating how the two religions cannot exist peacefully side by side.   This is another lesson not taught in today’s public schools!

It’s sad that the issue of immigration from Muslim lands has become a political football.   It would be a lot better if there were bipartisan agreement on the matter, but this is not going to happen. Consequently, the invasion will continue.   The Gatestone Institute revealed this week that Muslim immigrants arriving in Italy are shouting “Allahu Akbar” when they see the coast.   Why else would they be risking their lives to cross the Mediterranean Sea when they could simply walk into a neighboring Muslim country?   They see themselves as part of the Muslim army that is going to conquer Europe and the West.

Unless the Church and a political populist come together to try and save Western civilization!

Could Donald Trump lead the charge?   Or is it more likely that a European figure like Charlemagne will emerge to unite Europe and defeat the Muslims?   The biblical Book of Revelation speaks of a final revival of the Roman Empire (Revelation 17:12-14) that will deal with the Islamic threat from the “king of the south” (Daniel 11:40-43).

Footnote:    I would like to write an eye-witness report from a couple of European countries on the Muslim invasion of the continent. If you can donate frequent flyer miles (60,000) or money to cover expenses, please contact me at rhodesmf@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE PASSAGE OF TIME

Aubren watching the clock strike.
Aubren watching the clock strike.

We’re still moving.

Although the move has gone smoothly, we’re still adjusting to a new home and can’t seem to find anything when we need it.   Or it’s still at the old house!

One little thing has made quite a difference.

In 2002, our youngest daughter bought an “antique grandfather clock” from England that was a limited edition clock to celebrate the Golden Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II.   The clock bears a commemorative plate on the front.   Of course, it’s not really an antique as it’s only 14 years old, but it looks like an antique.   Finally, we have a good place for it and it’s now chiming every 15 minutes from 7am to 10pm.

Our eldest grandson loves it.

Wherever he is in his “new house” he runs to the clock when it starts chiming and is fascinated by it.   He then comes running back to me pointing in the direction of the clock and repeating enthusiastically “Hickory Dickory Dock.”   (Long-time readers will remember his love of the old nursery rhyme.)   I’m taking the opportunity to teach him time using the clock.   Every hour you hear the number of strokes denoting the passage of time.   The chimes are “Westminster” chimes, just like Big Ben.

Although, to be exact, not like Big Ben, which, after 150 years, has now been silenced for extensive repairs.  I don’t know what the BBC will do.  When we lived in Ghana, we heard the chimes of Big Ben every day on the BBC World Service, the most listened to radio service in the world.   In a period of turmoil, it conveyed a sense of stability, normalcy and even sanity.  But it’s now too old to continue – until it’s fully repaired.

Our clock and London’s famous clock are reminders of the passage of time.

No two days are exactly alike in this world.   Every fifteen minutes, there’s likely to be some change.   I wonder what the world of our grandchildren will be like when they are 65?

This year we are seeing some changes that may turn out to be very significant.

On Sunday, Austrians gave the right-wing Freedom Party the most votes in the first round of the Austrian presidential election. Now, the president of Austria does not have executive powers.   His responsibilities are more ceremonial, similar to what the Queen has in the United Kingdom.   However, he can dissolve parliament and call an election.   If he does, we may find his party wins and controls parliament.   Europe is moving to the right as the people reject the traditional centrist parties that have governed for seven decades. It’s similar to the 1930’s with a rising nationalism, xenophobia and economic stagnation all contributory factors.

Arguably, the same phenomenon is taking place in the United States with Donald Trump.

We see it in a number of different countries.  In the United Kingdom, a referendum is to take place in a few weeks on the country’s continued membership of the European Union.   We should not confuse this with the euro-zone – Britain has an exemption on this issue regardless of the outcome of the vote.   The EU itself is the issue in June. The EU has a great deal of support, but many want to put “Britain First,” the name of one of the anti-EU parties on the political right.

In hindsight, it was a big mistake for Britain to enter the Union in 1973.  But after more than 40 years of marriage, divorce is not going to be easy.   In the short-term the outcome may not make much of a difference.  The EU is evolving into something more akin to the Holy Roman Empire than the United States, with no two members seemingly alike.  Whatever the outcome of the June 23rd vote, the UK will have to come to terms with a German-dominated potential superpower on its doorstep.

So will the US.   Donald Trump gave a major speech yesterday calling for a radical reappraisal of US foreign policy.   He promised to put “America First,” the name of a movement in the 1930’s to keep America out of Europe’s rising conflict.

It’s been 25 years since the fall of communism but the US continues to spend billions each year defending long-time allies against Russia, China and North Korea.   There is growing resentment amongst American voters who feel that the US has to spend more than its fair share, at a time when Americans are experiencing a fall in their standard of living.

There could be significant changes if Trump wins the election in November.

At the same time, there could be significant changes in Europe regardless of who wins the US election.

King Solomon wrote 3,000 years ago:

“That which has been is what will be,
That which is done is what will be done,
And there is nothing new under the sun.”  (Ecclesiastes 1:9)

Future historians may label this period in time as “the rise of nationalism.”   But it’s nothing new.   We’ve been there before.   The post-World War II international set-up is increasingly falling apart.   Within the next few months we could see some real changes.

In Daniel 2:21 the ancient prophet says of God:

“And He changes the times and the seasons;
He removes kings and raises up kings;
He gives wisdom to the wise
And knowledge to those who have understanding.”

God is behind the rise and fall of nations.   America, like Britain before it, has had its period of pre-eminence.   A withdrawal from much of the world would inevitably diminish America’s international standing – the president would no longer be “the Leader of the Free World.”

It would be time for another superpower to fill the vacuum.

Like our grandfather clock, our grandchildren are likely to see these changes and feel the impact as their world dramatically changes.   They will need to remember the words of Jesus Christ to pray fervently for the Kingdom of God (Matthew 6:10).

IS CRIMEA EUROPE’S FUTURE?

crimea-map

It’s been exactly a hundred years since an assassin’s bullets opened up an ethnic can of worms across Europe, the Middle East, and eventually the rest of the world.

Prior to the assassination of the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand on June 28, 1914, Europe was not exactly free of ethnic tensions or religious divides.  Irish Catholics had been campaigning for Home Rule for decades; Hungarians wanted to rule themselves but remain under the Hapsburg crown; Poles wanted to be free of Russia, Germany, and Austria, free to resurrect their own nation again; Zionists wanted their own state in what is now Israel.

But, prior to 1914, imperialism was in vogue.  Large empires composed of multiple nationalities were more the norm.  Globalization was all the rage.

It all came crashing down as the most significant assassination in history led, 37 days later, to “the war to end all wars.”  After the war, the peace treaty allowed a number of different ethnic groups to have their own independent nation state.   The Czechs and Slovaks were grouped together in Czechoslovakia; the Poles got their own country; the Finns, too; Hungarians were formally separated from Austria; the Serbs, who, arguably started the war in the first place, got their own country with the Croats in the new Yugoslavia;  even the Ukrainians had a brief period of independence.

They have just had another such period, this time for over twenty years.  It may be coming to an end again.  Maybe.  Maybe not.

The vote in the Crimea on Sunday is a foregone conclusion, with 58% of the people in the region Russian speaking.  It’s not that the vote will be rigged – there’s no need for that.   The majority will vote to switch allegiance from Kiev to Moscow.  If it wasn’t a certainty, Russia would not be holding a referendum.   This vote, it is hoped, will justify their invasion and put an end to the whole matter.

It won’t be that simple.

What about the Ukrainian minority inside Crimea?  What about the Russian speaking areas in the east of Ukraine?  Will Russia invade them?  What about the Tatars?

Ah yes, the Tatars.

They constitute 12% of the population of the Crimea.  They were the pre-Russian inhabitants of the peninsula, invaded by Catherine the Great in the late eighteenth century.   They are a Turkic people left over from the days of the Ottoman Empire.  They are Muslims.  More significantly, they got a raw deal, a real raw deal, from Russia under Josef Stalin, who had them all forcibly removed from their homes and transported to Siberia with only 15 minutes notice.  They dread a return to Russian rule.

It may be that they have little to fear.  After all, neither Stalin nor Catherine were actually Russian.  But Russia is having difficulties already with its Muslim minorities – it’s unlikely the Tatars will fare any better than the Chechens.

The ethnic complexities of the region are symbolic of the wider European ethnic quilt.

Spain doesn’t want Crimea to break away from Ukraine because they don’t want their own Catalans to break away from their country; the Scots are voting in September on possibly breaking away from the United Kingdom; Belgium has had serious ethnic divisions ever since the country was created almost two centuries ago; the Balkans always has further potential for ethnic conflict; Rumania has a significant Hungarian minority that would like to join Hungary; while Hungary has its own minorities.

The EU has actually made the problem worse.   It is possible now for every small ethnic group to have its own country and still be economically viable through the European Union.  If Scotland breaks away from the UK, it can seek membership of the EU and minimize the economic consequences of breaking away from the bigger whole.

In theory.

They would actually have to have approval of the other member countries, including England.   And none of them has a vested interest right now in approving Scottish membership.  It might encourage separatists in their own countries.   Additionally, the last thing the 28-member EU needs is yet another voting member, holding back further progress toward European unity.  They also don’t want more members needing a bail-out.

However, it’s also possible that the proliferation of smaller countries in the EU could lead to a resurrection of the medieval Holy Roman Empire, a motley assortment of political entities that all owed allegiance to a common German emperor.

Rather than Sunday’s vote bringing an end to the European crisis, it may turn out to just be the beginning!