Word is getting out (via Glenn Beck) that London has initiated a program of social improvement which ultimately allows the government to literally ‘take out’ any person or family found guilty of “anti-social behavior.” BadEagle.com is researching the matter presently. Beck today (Monday, April 30, 2007) that London has already administered ‘social justice’ on some 9,000 familes. We have not found such a statistic yet, and furthermore, there is precious little on the internet at all. Beck presents the plan as a horrid NAZI flashback, but, the program that is on the internet appears quite differently. It’s called “Respect: Give Respect, Get Respect.” We note that the program for improving social behavior is designed by the Labour Party. It is a political campaign.
According to Beck, the government can simply arrest you, your family, or all guilty parties, and remove you from your domecile, and relocate you in what Beck calls “respect camps.” The powers invested are extensive. Property causing social offense, such as loud, noise-making devises of any kind, can be seized by the police. Cars, motorcycles, power tools, and even alcohol itself can be seized. It is an all-encompassing social improvement program.
The Anti-Social Behavior Order can be issued to anyone over 10 years of age. The ASBO is deadly, so it behooves everyone to know the law. Why, a Respect Handbook is provided by the government.
Before we indulge our fears abjectly, we should ask a few appropriate questions. This appears to be a community-based program for law inforcement. In other words, the police simply can’t handle all the misbehavior. The people have to take an initiative. Now, greater London according to the 2001 census, had well over half a million Muslims. (Today, it’s no doubt closer to three-quarters, if not a million or over.) One wonders if the ASBO campaign applies to Muslim terrorist, fomenting anti-London, anti-England, anti-Western, anti-Christian hatred on a daily basis. One wonders who has the right to be offended, and who doesn’t? One wonders who determines what is to be considered offensive and what isn’t.
The infection of shiria law (Muslim customs) is already deep in America, as well as in other Western countries. The Muslims have demanded everything from prayer mats in the airports to foot-washing basins for cabbies working at the airports. Is such an intrusion of foreigners and foreign religion possibly offensive? The University of Oklahoma just honored the would-be murder bomber, Joel Hinrichs, with a stone memorial plaque in the patio before the Student Union. Could not the accompanying anti-American blessing of OU’s president David Boren beconsidered offensive and anti-social? Many people think so. In Amsterdam (Netherlands), nine and ten-year-old Muslim school children began demolishing a classroom when the teacher, in the process of talking about rural farm life, spoke of pigs. The children, according to the Amsterdam news article, appear very much like Palestinian children–undisciplined, wallowing in welfare and the ills of poverty. The outrage against such state supported nonsense in the Netherlands is being voiced by the Labor Party there.
On the point of England’s Labour Party, and the Netherlands Labour Party, we must observe that the reaction to the liberal chaos is generated in the ‘conservative’ parties. However, in America’s view of Europe, the labour parties have always been associated with socialist, Communist parties. For the people, as in the American “Democrat Party” version. There is great confusion in the trans-continental communication.
The instincts of nationalism and preservation of culture are in America associated with conservative movements, while the multicultural aggressions are associated with liberalism–which in America is associated historically with Communism. The confusion is caused by the two-faced, hypcritical fronts put on my Communism. In it’s attempts to change the ‘status quo,’ (something created by conservatives and patriots and capitalist accomplishments of civilization), Communists will agitate discontent based on religion, race, or economic issues. Until everyone has a Cadillac, Communists say there is oppression. Until a Muslim is President of the United States, Communists will say there is religious oppression in America.
But Communism cares nothing for religion, race, or freedom. This is a facade.
So, it appears that the Labour Parites of Europe are actually more similar to American conservative movements. It could be that Glenn Beck is reading this London matter wrongly. Then again, the NAZI party of Germany came on gradually, with grand schemes of uptlifting, sanitizing social development, preserving the culture, etc.
It is difficult to assess these various political issues when the political language is ambiguous. Some of this may be historically inevitable, but I believe much of the confusion is intentional and deceptive. Tyranny is the natural goal of humanity. It is something that must always be guarded against. However, when one allows anti-cultural elements at home, like aggressive Muslims who hate the West and do everything to try to change it, the reaction–by the time it becomes effective–is toward the other end of the spectrum: also tyranny.
America had this all figured out at one time, or so it seems, looking back. However, with the influx of anti-American multi-culturalism, America’s nationalists and patriots stand liable to overreact with a vengeance. These are times that try men’s souls, indeed. We want freedom, but will that require oppressive measures? Or even the illusion of oppression? Iran has banned Western hair styles. We call that tyranny. If the West bans Islam, and all it’s “styles,” is that to be called tyranny?