The Execution of Britain

I will defend all Western and indeed infidel countries against Islamic Jihad, but I admit I feel especially close to Britain, not just because of the long cultural and historic ties between Scandinavia and the British Isles, but also because I appreciate the good that has come out of British culture. It makes me all the more sad to see how humiliated this great nation is today, and how many natives feel forced to leave what once was their country.

In May 2008, 18 year-old Ben Smith was stopped in a routine check. The police officer noticed an English flag on the parcel shelf and ordered him to remove it because it was "racist towards immigrants." One of the first things foreign powers usually do when they invade a country is to ban its national symbols. The fact that you can no longer run your flag in parts of Britain – and the Netherlands, Sweden, France, etc. – shows that the country is de facto under occupation, not just by Muslims, but by Multiculturalists and Globalists of all kinds.

In an essay entitled Put away the flags, Howard Zinn, the Leftist author of the best-selling book A People's History of the United States, writes that "On this July 4, we would do well to renounce nationalism and all its symbols: its flags, its pledges of allegiance, its anthems, its insistence in song that God must single out America to be blessed. Is not nationalism – that devotion to a flag, an anthem, a boundary so fierce it engenders mass murder – one of the great evils of our time, along with racism, along with religious hatred?" He concludes that "We need to assert our allegiance to the human race, and not to any one nation."

The problem is, rights can only be protected by sovereign states upholding their territorial integrity. How is "the global community" or "the human race" going to protect Mr. Zinn's liberties? For a free society to function, the state has to pass laws in the best interest of its citizenry and enforce these within its territory. Otherwise, self-government is impossible. In order to defend this territory from outside aggression, people need to identify with it as something more than just a random space on a map. By removing sovereign states, you remove the very foundations of a free society. Maybe some groups actually desire this?

The British Foreign Minister Milliband stated late in 2007 that the European Union should expand to include Muslim nations in North Africa and the Middle East. The French President Sarkozy and the German Chancellor Angela Merkel confirmed this early in 2008. Since the EU involves the free movement of people across borders, European leaders are thus opening the floodgates to tens of millions of Muslims at a time when native Europeans already feel like aliens in their own cities. It's the greatest betrayal in the history of Western civilization and it has been planned for many years, as those who have read Bat Ye'or's writings about Eurabia will know.

I believe native Europeans should seriously consider creating a European Indigenous People's Movement to protect our interests. Our authorities currently reward those who use violence and punish those who don't. Native Europeans are ignored if we protest peacefully against mass immigration or the expanding pan-European superstate. Muslims get concessions while we are treated with increasing hostility from those who are supposed to be our leaders.

Muslims in Jordan, a country that takes part in the Barcelona process of "Euro-Mediterranean cooperation" and thus a likely future EU member, recently sued the Danish cartoonists who drew Muhammad for "blasphemy" against Islam, a "crime" that potentially carries the death penalty according to sharia law. Not too many years into the future, we could face a situation where citizens of, say, Denmark could be arrested by their own authorities and handed over to be tried for "crimes against Islam" in one of the Arab "partner countries" of the EU. If this sounds unthinkable to you, look at the case of the Dutch cartoonist who was recently arrested by a dozen police officers for the crime of publishing cartoons insulting immigrants.

PM Tony Blair expressed "profound relief" over the end of a hostage crisis in 2007 where British soldiers had been kidnapped by the Islamic Republic of Iran, telling the mullahs that "we bear you no ill will." Blair will be remembered as one of the worst leaders in history. Even Chamberlain didn't flood his country with enemies and present this as something positive. Mass immigration has been going on for decades but showed a spectacular increase under Blair's and Brown's Labour regime. The spike was so powerful that it is tempting to speculate whether the authorities had deliberately set out to dismantle their own nation.

According to newspaper columnist Leo McKinstry, the English are being turned into second-class citizens in their own country: "England is in the middle of a profoundly disturbing social experiment. For the first time in a mature democracy, a Government is waging a campaign of aggressive discrimination against its indigenous population."

Similar things are happening all over the Western world, not just in England or Britain, but Britain is definitely one of the worst countries, yes. I've been debating with people which country is most likely to get the first Eurabian civil war triggered by mass immigration. There are several possible candidates, but my money is on Britain, because the anger among ordinary citizens is only rivaled by the brutal political repression tactics.

In a survey published in April 2008, one in three medical doctors in Britain said that elderly patients should not be given free treatment if it were unlikely to do them good for long. At the same time, Muslim men with multiple wives have been given the go-ahead to claim extra welfare benefits. The "welfare state" now means that the natives should watch grandma die because she's getting old anyway and we need the money to pay Muslims with multiple wives and numerous children so that they can feel comfortable while colonizing the country.

Also in April 2008, David T, a stunned dad and his little boy, were banned from swimming at a popular public sports center in east London because this was a "Muslim men-only swimming" session. Several Christian priests have been physically attacked by Muslims in east London, leading one bishop to worry about "no-go-zones" for Christian in some parts of the country. In early June, a Muslim police community support officer ordered Christian preachers to stop handing out gospel leaflets in a predominantly Muslim area of Birmingham. They were threatened with arrest for committing a "hate crime" and were told they risked being beaten up if they returned. In March 2008, two Islamic terrorists were moved to different prisons after complaining that their fellow inmates were "too white." Dhiren Barot had masterminded a radioactive bomb plot involving limousines packed with nails and explosives and Omar Khyam plotted to blow up the Bluewater shopping centre in Kent.

How do native Brits react to this? Well, some get angry, as they should. Bryan Cork, 49, was jailed for six months for "racist slurs" after he had shouted insults at Muslim worshippers outside a Cumbria mosque, including "proud to be British" and "go back to where you came from." This was after the London Jihadist bombings in 2005. Judge Paul Batty told him that racism in any form would not be tolerated. I hear much talk about "national suicide" these days, but Mr. Cork apparently had no desire to commit national suicide, he was held down by his own authorities for refusing to accept the organized destruction of his nation. What we are dealing with here isn't suicide; it's an execution of an entire nation, perhaps an entire civilization, the greatest civilization ever created by man.

Even children face this kind of ideological intimidation. Codie Stott, a teenage British schoolgirl, was forced to spend hours in a police cell after she was reported by her teachers for "racism." She had objected, in the mildest possible terms, to being placed during class with a group of South Asian immigrants who talked among themselves in a language she didn't understand. For this, she was dragged to the local police station and had her fingerprints and photograph taken. 18-year-old Jamie who has Down's syndrome and the mental age of a five-year-old was charged with "racism" after an argument with an immigrant. Meanwhile, the UK is being brought to its knees in an epidemic of violent crime and white native girls get raped by immigrants in spectacular numbers, just like all over Western Europe.

Why do people still take this lying down? I wonder about that sometimes. Maybe they feel that their votes don't matter and have resigned into a state of quiet apathy. Since many are dependent upon government support and being branded a "bigot" could cause you to lose your livelihood, people still have too much to lose by openly opposing these policies. Such subtle blackmail can be quite effective in suppressing dissent. This could, however, change rapidly in the event of a serious economic downturn. Another crucial element is confusion. People are deliberately kept in the dark by the media and the authorities regarding the full scale of what they are facing. Combined with Muslim violence and intimidation of critics, we have a climate of fear and confusion. People who are scared and confused can be easily controlled.

I've recently been re-reading the books of American evolutionary biologist Jared Diamond, especially Guns, Germs, and Steel. He has some points, but his most important flaw is his complete failure to explain how the Greater Middle East went from being a global center of civilization, which it was in ancient times, to being a global center of anti-civilization. This was not caused by smallpox or because zebras are more difficult to domesticate than water buffaloes. It was caused by Islam. Diamond, with his emphasis on historical materialism, fails to explain the rise of the West and especially why English, not Arabic, Chinese or Mayan, became the global lingua franca. What's so special about those rainy and foggy islands?

As Australian author Keith Windschuttle told a New Zealand audience, "The concepts of free enquiry and free expression and the right to criticise entrenched beliefs are things we take so much for granted they are almost part of the air we breathe. We need to recognise them as distinctly Western phenomena." He warns that the survival of this great achievement now depends entirely "on whether we have the intelligence to understand their true value and the will to face down their enemies."

No other civilization on earth ever created an equivalent of the European university system. One of the most important reasons why Europe surpassed China during the early modern age is more political freedom and free speech. The reason why English became the dominant language is because Britain and its offspring enjoyed great political liberty even by Western standards, and a corresponding economic dynamism.

Probably no empire in world history has been more benevolent than the British Empire, yet a report from February 2008 recommended that patriotism should be avoided in school lessons because British history is "morally ambiguous." I suppose Islamic history isn't, with almost 1400 years of brutal Jihad warfare on several continents?

I'm sure the British are being told that the ongoing mass immigration is a result of their "colonial history." I live in a country with no colonial history, yet we are still subject to mass immigration. We are also being told that we should allow Pakistani or Nigerian flags to celebrate our Constitution Day because this will be "good for integration." This has nothing to do with colonialism. So what does it have to do with? Well, I'm starting to wonder whether it has something to do with the Western love affair with free speech and political liberty. Those who desire a world where society is regulated and everybody does what the authorities tell them to do fear this Western preference for political self-determination.

If we look at the West during the past thousand years, we have generally enjoyed an unusually high degree of freedom and power sharing. This has been the case more in some periods and countries than in others, but in the big scheme of things this remains true. However, although this arrangement has been good for our civilization as a whole, some of our elites apparently are jealous of the more authoritarian system in other cultures. They want to turn the West into a "normal," meaning more corrupt and less free, civilization, aided by the forces of globalization. We are witnessing rising nepotism, and perhaps those at the top desire this.

The political elites no longer believe in stupid things such as borders, cultures and national sovereignty. Islam upsets their world-view, so they ignore it and move on with their project of globalization, anyway. The most hardcore Leftists actively side with Islam because its hatred of the West and its concept of a global umma coincide with their own globalist outlook. Yes, I know that Socrates stated "I am not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world," but I don't think he meant it quite as literally as Western elites do now. Socrates didn't have an entire village of Muslims transplanted to his street during the space of a single generation, and he didn't have his daughters or female relatives raped by Muslims in his own country.

Our traditional freedoms were the result of a specific culture, developed over centuries of hard struggles. Maybe other cultures have to go through similar struggles of their own to achieve this, and some will perhaps never be able to do so. We should protect our freedoms at home before we try to export them, and we should protect them by preserving the European-derived culture which created them.

Our enemies, internal and external, want to destroy the Western world because we represent liberty, and they want to destroy Britain in particular because it gave birth to the most powerful pro-liberty culture within the Western tradition. I hope the British can regain their strength and throw off their traitor class, but they need to do so soon. We cannot allow the greatest nation in human history to be destroyed by the planet's most barbaric cultures. The British people, like their Dutch, German, Italian, Spanish and Danish counterparts, have every right to desire self-determination and self-preservation, and limit or even completely halt immigration as they see fit to ensure this. Those who say otherwise are evil, and need to be exposed as such. The Western world is under attack by a global Islamic Jihad. To support continued mass immigration of Muslims in this situation should be regarded as high treason, and punished as such.

See also:

Creating a European Indigenous People’s Movement
, 6 April 2008

Education of Bilingual Muslim Children

The demand for Muslim schools comes from parents who want their children a safe environment with an Islamic ethos.Parents see Muslim schools where children can develop their Islamic Identity where they won't feel stigmatised for being Muslims and they can feel confident about their faith.
Muslim schools are working to try to create a bridge between communities.

There is a belief among ethnic minority parens that the British schooling does not adequatly address their cultural needs. Failing to meet this need could result in feeling resentment among a group who already feel excluded. Setting up Muslim school is a defensive response.

State schools with monolingual teachers are not capable to teach English to bilingual Muslim children. Bilingual teachers are needed to teach English to such children along with their mother tongue. According to a number of  studies, a child will not learn a second language if his first language is ignored.

Bilingual Muslim children need state funded Muslim schools with bilingual Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental periods. Muslims
have the right to educate their children in an environment that suits their culture. This notion of "integration", actually means "assimilation", by which people generally really mean "be more like me". That is not
multiculturalism. In Sydney, Muslims were refused to build a Muslim school, because of a protest by the residents. Yet a year later, permission was
given for the building of a Catholic school and no protests from the residents. This clrearly shows the blatant hypocrisy, double standards and racism. Christians oppose Muslim schools in western countries yet build
their own religious schools.

British schooling and the British society is the home of institutional racism. The result is that Muslim children are unable to develop self-confidence and self-esteem, therefore, majority of them leave schools with low grades. Racism is deeply rooted in British society. Every native child is born with a gene or virus of racism, therefore, no law could change the attitudes of racism towards those who are different. It is not only the common man, even member of the royal family is involved in racism. The
father of a Pakistani office cadet who was called a "***" by Prince Harry has profoundly condemned his actions. He had felt proud when he met the Queen and the Prince of Wales at his son's passing out parade at Sandhurst
in 2006 but now felt upset after learning about the Prince's comments. Queen Victoria invited an Imam from India to teach her Urdu language. He was highly respected by the Queen but other members of the royal family had no respect for him. He was forced to go back to India. His protrait is still in one of the royal places.

There are hundreds of state schools where Muslim pupils are in majority. In my opinion, all such schools may be designated as Muslim community schools with bilingual Muslim teachers. There is no place for a non-Muslim child or a teacher in a Muslim school.
Iftikhar Ahmad
London School of Islamics Trust


Mr. Iftikhar's timely comment perfectly illustrates the duplicity of both liberals and Muslims under the multicultural regime. In the name of equality and universalism, Europeans are asked to welcome the establishment of a hostile, exclusionary, alien culture on their territory, and to surrender and reject their own culture, with its very substantial advantages to themselves. The factual background that Mr. Iftikhar describes is evidence that Muslims do not belong in Western countries and that Islam is incompatible with Western culture, not that Westerners are failing to realize their high ideals. The solution to the educational and cultural problems Mr. Iftikhar describes is simple. Muslims should live in Muslim countries. They should go home. If they don't want to go home, they should convert to Christianity and attempt to assimilate as best they can, though they will remain foreigners for a long time.

I believe Mr. Iftikhar agrees that Muslims should live in Muslim countries, but his idea is that Britain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Spain, the U.S.A., and Australia must become Muslim countries. Deo volente, we will disappoint him!

I hate to seem racist in

I hate to seem racist in anyway, but I have to agree with you. It’s members of the Muslim community who are attacking innocents with suicide bombers and yet Britain (or at least the people in charge) seem to be welcoming them more than ever. I find the Muslim community is also very racist towards anyone who isn’t a Muslim… I even found this when I was staying in an Italy Hotel and a Muslim family there miss-treated us simply because we were British. 

Excellent article!

Yes, we are all on the back foot now. Expect it to get a lot worse if Barack Al-Qaeda Hussein Obama - a Mugabe in the making - becomes POTUS. Europe, America, Israel, Oceania and South Africa are becoming flooded with Third Worlders, who only take and do not give, demanding more and more liberties and handouts. Enough! We need to organize, support one another, switch off the TV and politicize everything we do, from where we take our vacations to what we teach our kids to what we buy in the supermarket. Enough of this destructive multicultural bullsh*t!

the execution of Britain

Your post is really interesting and catching ; yet, I can't help being upset (a nice British understatement!) by your omitting Greece, Portugal and .....France among the countries that "deserve" some help in their fight to preserve their identity and culture ; I think some people are only too ready to sacrify their real roots (Greece!!) or easy scapegoats (Portugal and France) on the altar of Muslim-Moloch
Sincerely, I could weep over the fate of my beloved "sceptered isle" ; Yet, I'd rather fight at her side than accuse her of all the sins of her rotten politicians!

The Great Zionist Andrex Conspiracy (GZAC).



Yes, I already knew about that. When I first read the article in question, it just got me to wondering how long it might be before we Brits are introduced to the full civilizing influences of traditional Islamic toilet etiqutte, to be introduced as a counter to 'The Great Zionist Andrex Conspiracy' of the 1930's.


@ Atlanticist911

You have no idea when you lose your concentration for 5 minutes, enter a toilet of that particular culture and realize, only 30 seconds too late, that you are stuck in that culture. It makes you want to nuke a few holy cities.

Three recent quotes from the British Press

1- "Masked men caught on church roof stealing lead...but that's not enough evidence, say police". Daily Mail, Saturday, June , 2008.



2- "Two fingers to common sense"


BINMEN have issued an astonishing warning...If we can't pull your wheelie bin

using just two fingers it is too heavy - and it won't be emptied.


Bins that need three or more fingers, they claim, constitute a health and safety risk...


3- Flossing for Jesus, anyone?


Using a specially developed syllabus, mosque leaders and teachers help spread the word about oral health, encouraging youngsters to brush their teeth daily through the teachings of the Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) and Islam.


Daily Mail, Friday, June 6, 2008.



@ Atlanticist911

Your point 3 has a reason, they don't use a brush and toothpaste, they use a special fibrous wooden stick to clean their teeth, because the "prophet used it".

The disease of "diversity"

Chalk another triumph up to multi-culti in vibrant modern Britain:

'Normal cops can be punished with a fine or loss of pay or a reduction in rank. It didn't happen in her case because she was a special. They are volunteers, so they can't be fined. The only discipline for them is dismissal, and as far as the Met was concerned, Nisha was Asian and a woman. I can see the corruption allegations may be considered dynamite, but the Met doesn't want that. Politically, they would prefer to leave it as it is - that she was a brave officer, etc.'

There are more than 12,000 special constables serving alongside full-time police officers on Britain's streets. In the Metropolitan Police, a recruitment drive has seen the percentage of specials from ethnic minorities almost double in recent years. Yet still more are wanted to meet the Met's diversity targets. Judging by the extraordinary case of Nisha Patel, the question must be asked: Will senior officers overlook unpalatable truths to achieve those targets?

Nisha and a police cover-up: She was a vice madam with a criminal record

@Fjordman RE: The Execution of Britain

Fjordmanmany native feel forced to leave what once was their country.


Including many 'successful' non-Whites e.g. Blacks to other Commonwealth countries.


Fjordman: One of the first things foreign powers usually do when they invade a country is to ban its national symbols.


Though I support English nationalism, England is not a nation-state. Moreover, as England is the core of the UK, English nationalism is far more threatening than the Scottish or Welsh variants to the integrity of the British state.


Fjordman: The problem is, rights can only be protected by sovereign states upholding their territorial integrity.


It is the opinion of globalists and internationalists that a global state can accomplish this, and that the eventual submergence of existing national, sub- and supranational polities into it is inevitable. The question is not whether or not nation-states are useful to the ends of individual rights and freedoms. However, any polity between anarchy and totalitarianism might accomplish this. There are in fact two questions, namely: (1) do sovereign nation-states have a higher instrumental value in this regard (i.e. more efficient) than other forms of political organisation? And (2) do they have an intrinsyc and inalienable value that makes them the ideal polity?


Fjordman: What we are dealing with here isn't suicide; it's an execution of an entire nation, perhaps an entire civilization, the greatest civilization ever created by man.


Are you referring to English civilization? Moreover, this "execution" is hardly unprecedented e.g. the Shoah.


Fjordman: It was caused by Islam. Diamond, with his emphasis on historical materialism, fails to explain the rise of the West and especially why English, not Arabic, Chinese or Mayan, became the global lingua franca. What's so special about those rainy and foggy islands?


Perhaps the 19th century racialist academics Diamond derides were right...


Fjordman: To support continued mass immigration of Muslims in this situation should be regarded as high treason, and punished as such.


No disagreement there. One day real estate won't be such a good investment...

The Enlightenment

Thank you, Fjordman, for this essay.  Your response to _Guns, Germs, and Steel_ echoed my own.  It is clear that Islam was a boon for Arabian culture early on because this lock-step monotheistic political/religious system had huge advantages over the chaotic and ununified pagen culture that it replaced.  But once a rival culture--Western culture--hit upon the Enlightenment, the weaknesses of Islam were apparent.  For the Muslim world to admit the obvious, though, would require some sort of miracle.  As a result, the Muslim university systems--including that of Turkey, which was never colonized but was itself a colonizing empire--are an utter embarrassment that contribute nothing to medical science or to any science I can think of. 


By the way, I couldn't help but think when you asked "Why do people still take this lying down?" that Americans simply wouldn't take it lying down.

timeless maxims

@ cephran



Yes, I have heard that timeless maxim before, and I've also heard the one about not wrestling pigs because both you and the pig get muddy, but the pig enjoys it. While I have no personal interest in the sport of pig wrestling, I must confess to having a weakness, bordering on a passion, for bore hunting.



@Stephen Gash

"The greatest threat to England is the United Kingdom.

The deadliest enemies of the English are the British."

I think you're right about this.
Tony Blair and Gordon Brown didn't care if they flooded England with immigrants because it's not their country.
They're Scots.

I have nothing against the Scots but Scottish politicians seem unable to see things from an English perspective.

If it were Scotland that were being so radically transformed by immigration I think severe restrictions would have been put in place long ago.

Regarding the problems of grooming white British girls into prostitution, mentioned in the timesonline link, you may want to look at the following links:

Brussels Journal: Racial Tension, and Sexual Exploitation

Panorama - Teenage Sex For Sale S56E11 (March 27, 2008)

Panorama - Teenage Sex For Sale (google video)

intellectuals # 3

@ kappert


 Did I (deliberately) misunderstand you? Was it too simplistic a response for your liking? If so, perhaps you'd care to address the second part of cephran's point which was, "...because they seek to consolidate government power for the expressed purposes of extinguishing those freedoms we hold dear".

Tell us why  in your opinion that observation is a flawed one?




Before wasting your breath by getting on the merry-go-round that is Kappert, you may want to remember the timeless maxim:

"Don't argue with a fool. The spectators can't tell the difference"

The man(?)doesn't deserve your time or energy.


"political movements like the EU, Multiculturalism and Global Warming must be defeated"

Comments like that evidence the superb intelligence of man.


Sad to see how far the British goverment ha gone trying to please immigrants and Islamists.

I wonder what went wrong in "God old britan".

Luckely I live in Denmark, where it is common to show the Dannebrog everywhere we please, on our cars, boats, houses etc. And we flad it from our flag poles every day, whenever it pleases us.

We would gladly accept a couple of british refugees in to our country, after all the would just be coming home after 800 years aboard :)

Matbee it's time for us to reconqour the british iles again, the seem week, and could easely be overrun....

Odin - Chief of Vikings


What's odd is the same people,

the international left, epitimized by such publications as the Guardian and the Independent, who tried to bring down the UK/US for the Soviets are now considered something of voices of authority when it comes to the new multicultural reality. It's as if everyone's forgotten that these are the same people that told us all that the Soviet Union was going to dominate the world and we'd better get used to it; and now that the Soviet threat has been removed, it's as if that history has been wiped clean and these people are being listened to and followed by the UK government (and will be by an Obama administration). But, essentially their world-view hasn't changed all that much: everything, whether it's jihadism or global warming is the fault of Western civilization and capitalism, and especially the US/UK. And these are the people now in power (or soon will be) of the very countries they blame for all the world's problems. It's insane, an act of collective amnesia perhaps unmatched in history.

Good comment .

Well said Stephen , you made the point before I could , the English can manage without Britain , could Britain manage without England ?

England not Britain

The greatest threat to England is the United Kingdom.


The deadliest enemies of the English are the British.


The nastiest bigots are those prejudiced against their own people.

Why eliminate nation states

Nation state is the enlarged version of a family. It was created by Father (King or forefather) and the country itself is Mother (it gives birth, feeds and protects) to the members of the family. Rejection of nation state is like adolescent rejection of one's family, caused by the Oedipus complex - unwillingness to agree to the priority of Father (King, Authority).

However, Fjordman is right that what is now happening is more than rejection of the nation state. it is the assault on the West as a whole.

To Fjordman



Thank you for another brilliant commentary on the suicide that Western nations are engaged in. 


I'm American but I will sign that petition because the suicidal tendencies of the European "elite" are attempting (quite successfully) to be exported to the United States.


American Liberals have a love affair with failed European policies and social experiments and are actively attempting to create the same multiculturalism that has paralyzed Europe.


American Liberals also hate their country's nationalism and status as world superpower with the same venom and vigor as the so-called European "elite" hate dissenters of the European Superstate takeover.


I'll sign that petition because men of good will must stand together to fight tyranny and the destruction of our Western Civilization by people who HATE its very existence.  These power-mad Globalists resent the personal freedoms of thought, movement, religion and self determination that a free society has brought to its people.


That's why political movements like the EU, Multiculturalism and Global Warming must be defeated because they seek to consolidate government power for the expressed purposes of extinguishing those freedoms we hold dear.


Are we men willing to fight for the freedoms purchased with so much blood or are we sheep being prepared to be slaughtered?


Who will stand up and be counted?  I will!