The UN and White Genocide By Chris Knight

     Back in the year 2000, there was a UN document prepared which championed the idea of “replacement migration” in Europe, to deal with the alleged problem of a declining and ageing population:  No prizes for guessing the conclusions: migration is the big answer to every problem, provided that it is the migration of non-White people to the West. They meant it when talking about “replacement.”

     Documents such as this are actually quite common, and form the standard tool kit of the pro-migration lobby. It would be a mistake to identify one document as being the key, just as old salts activists decades ago, used to single out the Lima Declaration as being the main bad guy document leading to what we now call globalism. There is no one document, but rather a cultural movement among the power elite to push for changes, undermining the traditional world.

     The same applies to sharia law, with Islam likely to be the religion of choice of the globalists. How else to explain the inroads made to the university system, with law courses now teaching the alleged “benefits” of sharia law? See: Here’s what this US article says about what is happening down our street:

“Australia’s most prestigious law school accommodates two courses which call for elements of sharia law to be incorporated in the mainstream legal system — including allowances for polygamy and lowering the age of consent to end opposition to child marriage. The courses also chide judges who denounce Muslim values during sentencing.
Sydney University’s Muslim Minorities And The Law course uses a textbook which promotes the idea that “sharia and common law are not inherently incompatible”, the Daily Telegraph reports. It is taught by Professors Salim Farrar and Dr Ghena Krayem.

“They are both ‘law’ in the sense they represent and communicate a set of ‘norms’ that operate at both individual and a community level,” the book explains. A portion of the textbook identifies the benefits of ending monogamous relationships and notes how sharia law does not recognise the minimum age in marriage.
“There is no minimum age for a contract of marriage, but it should not be consummated if that would cause harm to the putative spouse,” the book reads. “Whilst some have argued that there may be reasons for changing marriage laws to include polygamous marriages… there have not been any proposals for any legislative amendment proposed by the Muslim communities in our Common Law jurisdictions.”

As to the need for Western society to accommodate traditional Islamic views on a host of issues, the textbook pleads for special treatment for Muslims before the courts.
“Where found guilty of transgressing Western values, for example in gender equality, or violating national security, courts have clearly communicated their denunciation of ‘traditional’ or conservative Muslim values when sentencing, dispensing exemplary sentences and announcing aggravating factors, even when the written law does not explicitly demand it.”

    How is all of this possible in a politically correct environment, where feminists are ever ready to pounce on any male who dares to criticise, or break norms? The answer must be, that there is no consistent ideology of “justice’ here, but rather, one having an agenda of attacking White Western civilisation. Nothing else makes any sense of all of this.

     Ok, we now know the problem. Let’s get to work to solve it before lunch time. It should not be any problem given the quality of people here to work with. You know, those who are now deserting the minor parties such as One Nation, and returning to the mother bosom of the Lib-Lab Party: The Australian, July 24, 2017, p. 1.

With a team like this, how can we lose?



No comments made yet. Be the first to submit a comment
Already Registered? Login Here
Wednesday, 23 September 2020
If you'd like to register, please fill in the username, password and name fields.

By accepting you will be accessing a service provided by a third-party external to