Европейская декларация независимости - 236
Solutions for South Africa Divide the country in to two sovereign nations; one European nation and one African. This should be facilitated by the future European Federation as the current Boer/Afrikaner people are in no shape to administrate or ensure that this split is effectuated properly.
The split should be based on historical significance of factors relating to development of the nation and should therefore be no less than 40% (Afrikaner/Boer/European)/60% African. The racist apartheid ideology should never be used again. Instead, the Afrikaner/Boer can (if they need the extra labour) issue 6 or 12 months work permits for specific sectors following the model illustrated in another chapter of this compendium. A security fence should separate the newly founded nations to prevent illegal immigration and potential attacks.
A future European Federation must play an instrumental part in creation of these two nations.
See other documentation and sources here: http://afrikaner-genocide-achives.blogspot.com/ Picture albums of murdered Afrikaners and Boers (2008-2010): http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2040597&id=1026941238&saved#/album.php? aid=2040597&id=1026941238 Initials from A to B: http://cid-b6b44a5376348175.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/Kill%20the %20Boer%20Kill%20the%20Farmer%202009%20victims%20A%20-%20B B to J: http://cid-b6b44a5376348175.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/Kill%20the%20Boer%20Kill %20the%20Farmer%202008%20victims%20A%20-%20J C to F http://cid-b6b44a5376348175.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/Kill%20the%20Boer%20Kill %20the%20Farmer%202009%20victims%20C%20-%20F G to J: http://cid-b6b44a5376348175.skydrive.live.com/brwse.aspx/Kill%20the%20Boer%20Kill %20the%20Farmer%202009%20victims%20G%20-%20J K to S: http://cid-b6b44a5376348175.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/Kill%20the%20Boer%20kill %20the%20Farmer%202009%20victims%20K%20-%20S N to O: http://cid-b6b44a5376348175.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/Kill%20the%20Boer%20kill %20the%20Farmer%202009%20victims%20N%20-%20O P to R: http://cid-b6b44a5376348175.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/Kill%20the%20Boer%20kill %20the%20farmer%202009%20victims%20P%20-%20R Q to Z -1 http://cid-b6b44a5376348175.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/Kill%20the%20Boer %20Kill%20the%20Farmer%202009%20victims%20Q%20-%20Z Q to Z -2 http://cid-b6b44a5376348175.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/Kill%20the%20Boer %20kill%20the%20Farmer%202009%20victims%20S%20-%20Z Source: 1. http://sarahmaidofalbion.blogspot.com/ 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimbabwe Quarterly Digest Of Statistics, Zimbabwe Printing and Stationery Office, 1999.
Other sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid 2. The Israeli security fence and other security barriers While most people refer to Israel's security fence as a "wall", the fact remains that less than 5 percent of the barrier is actually concrete slab. The rest is a network of fence and sensors. The fence has cut terrorism incidents by more than 90% since its completion.
What was the reason for establishing the Security Fence Area? The Security Fence is being built with the sole purpose of saving the lives of the Israeli citizens who continue to be targeted by the terrorist campaign that began in 2000. The fact that over 800 men, women and children have been killed in horrific suicide bombings and other terror attacks clearly justifies the attempt to place a physical barrier in the path of terrorists. It should be noted that terrorism has been defined throughout the international community as a crime against humanity. As such, the State of Israel not only has the right but also the obligation to do everything in its power to lessen the impact and scope of terrorism on the citizens of Israel. As such, the creation of the Security Fence was created in accordance with security and humanitarian concerns. Israel has not just a right but a duty to defend its citizens.
Is the fence effective? Between Israel and the areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority there is no natural or man made barrier. This enables the almost unhindered entry of Palestinian terrorists into Israel. During the last three years, 117 Palestinian terrorists took advantage of it, entered into Israel and in the act of blowing themselves up murdered 477 people - Jews, Arabs and Christians and wounded thousands others. In contrast, the security fence between Israel and the Gaza Strip that has existed since 1996 has proven its effectiveness and the vast majority of terrorist attempts have been discovered and thwarted.
The first stage of the Security Fence (from Salem to Elkana) which has been operational since July 2003, is already proving itself as an effective defensive deterrent which prevents the repeated attempts to enter Israel and carry out terror attacks.
Members of Palestinian terror infrastructure caught and questioned disclosed the fact that the existence of the Security Fence in the Samaria area forces them to find of other means to perform terror attacks since their previous entry to Israel is blocked.
Conclusion: The physical separation (apartheid) of the Israelis and the Muslims works as intended.
The Islamic terrorist attacks have been reduced by 90% since the creation of the physical barrier.
The Indian security fence The concept of building security fences between groups of people is not limited to Israel.
In 1989, the Indian government, frustrated at the continued infiltration of terrorists from Pakistan, constructed a security barrier along the frontier in the states of Punjab and Rajasthan. The barrier worked and infiltration subsided. Five years later, India sought to extend the barrier 620 miles through Jammu and Kashmir. The Pakistani government's reaction to India's barrier-building was harsh. Islamabad accused India of violating both the U.N. charter and the two countries' cease fire agreement. In July 2003, Pakistani military spokesman, Shaukat Sultan, made several threats.
But the Indian government ignored these threats, citing its right to defend itself against terrorism. After all, since 1989 more than 40,000 people have perished in Jammu and Kashmir in terrorism and insurgency-related violence. And, just as Israel has found its barrier to be a successful deterrent, so, too, has India. According to the chief-of-staff of the Indian army, Nirmal Chand Vij, the number of terrorists inside Jammu and Kashmir plummeted almost 50 percent in the year after the barrier's construction. The fence stopped almost 90 percent of infiltration attempts. India's vote against Israel's West Bank barrier may have undermined its own position, a fact that was not lost on at least one Pakistani senator. In a July debate in the Pakistani senate, Ishaq Dar suggested that Islamabad parlay the ICJ ruling into a move to condemn India's fence construction along its line-of-control.
Conclusion: The physical separation (apartheid) of the Indians and the Pakistani Muslims works as intended. The Islamic terrorist attacks have been reduced significantly since the creation of this physical barrier.
The Saudi security fence The kingdom of Saudi Arabia, one of Israel's most vociferous critics in the Middle East and a staunch financial supporter of groups such as Hamas, has also constructed a border fence on disputed land. Saudi Arabia and Yemen have disputed their border for more than seventy years. Both countries dispute the demarcation laid out in the 1934 Taif treaty, and today, almost 1,000 miles of desert and mountains remain undefined. While both countries may initially have been content to live with the status quo, that changed with the 1990 discovery of oil in the disputed zone. The Saudi government moved to build a "military city" near the disputed border. Violence occasionally flared. In November 1997, for example, after a Yemeni soldier lowered a Saudi flag in the disputed area of Qarqa'i, several Saudi and Yemeni soldiers died in an exchange of fire. Another bloody clash took place in January 2000 when Saudi troops occupied Jabal Jahfan, a mountain long controlled by Yemen. A June 2000 attempt to resolve the dispute failed. While both Saudi and Yemeni leaders signed the resulting Jeddah treaty, the text left unresolved large tracts of the border.
Violence erupted in 2002. In the Saudi border town of Jizan, Saudi border guards confronted Islamists smuggling weapons from Yemen. Thirty-six Saudi soldiers died in the ensuing fire fight. Following additional violence along the border, the kingdom decided unilaterally to build a security barrier along their border with Yemen. Saudi officials claimed that this barrier would stem the weapons flow and almost daily attempts at infiltration by Islamist insurgents from Yemen. Talal Anqawi, the head of Saudi Arabia's border guards, dismissed any parallels to Israel's security barrier, telling the Arabic daily Asharq al-Awsat, “What is being constructed inside our borders with Yemen is a sort of a screen … which aims to prevent infiltration and smuggling … it does not resemble a wall in any way.” If Anqawi sought to create a litmus test for the permissibility of barriers, he failed. While the ICJ referred to Israel's security fence as a "wall" throughout its decision, less than 5 percent of the barrier is actually concrete slab. The rest is a network of fence and sensors.
While the Saudi government presses the U.N. to sanction Israel to force compliance with the ICJ decision, the kingdom, through its own actions and statements, has actually created a precedent for Israel. Saudi statements labeling Israel's security barrier an "internationally wrongful act" and demanding its "destruction," illustrate the hypocrisy of both the Saudi and ICJ positions.
Note: Also see apartheid/security fences and population exchanges in Turkey (between Turkey and Syria), Cyprus (between Muslims and Christians), Morocco (between Morocco and Western Sahara) and in Northern Ireland.
Good Fences Make Good Neighbours Israel's fence exists to prevent deadly attacks on Israeli citizens. The Belfast peace lines exist to prevent large-scale intercommunal disorders … but a barrier is a barrier, whatever its name … their [British and Israeli] policies towards the nationalist areas of Belfast and the Palestinian areas of the Holy Land have one thing in common … to provide security." When the ICJ ruled on July 9 that Israel's security barrier was illegal, it based its decisions exclusively on interpretation of international humanitarian law. Fourteen of the fifteen judges ruled that Israel should raze its barrier. The one dissenting justice, Thomas Buergenthal, was American. He argued that the court failed to consider all relevant facts.
He wrote, "The nature of these cross-Green Line attacks and their impact on Israel and its population are never really seriously examined by the court." While the ICJ claimed that Israel could not invoke "the right of legitimate or inherent self-defence," Buergenthal disagreed. After all, in resolutions 1368 and 1373, the U.N. Security Council reaffirmed the right to combat terrorism without limitation to "state actors only." And there is little doubt that the security barriers work. Suicide attacks in Israel declined 75 percent in the first six months of 2004 compared to an equivalent period in 2003. The Israeli government is not alone in this conclusion. Many of the most vocal critics of Israel's security barrier have employed the same defence. Their immunity from ICJ and U.N.
criticism illustrates both the politicisation of the International Court of Justice and the inherent bias of the United Nations. U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan's criticism of Israel's security barrier, especially when juxtaposed with his silence regarding the region's other security barriers, illustrates the double standard.
Perhaps the greatest tragedy of the ICJ decision, however, is that it creates a precedent that allows terrorism to trump security. Israel will not be the only victim. The Turkish government, which vociferously condemned Israel, unwittingly undermined its own security with regard to Syria. Some Pakistani politicians already seek to use the ICJ's decision on Israel to undermine India's self-defence. While separate peace processes proceed in Cyprus, Western Sahara, and Northern Ireland, it was the dampening of terrorism made possible by the security barriers that allowed the space for diplomats to resume negotiations. On a number of levels, the ICJ decision was a ruling against peace and security, not only in Israel but also across the region and elsewhere.
Sources: 1. http://www.meforum.org/652/is-israels-security-barrier-unique 3. The demographical annihilation of the European population in the US due to Asian, Mexican and African mass immigration (ROUGH DRAFT) In the early 1980s the US was considered a Christian and European nation. In fact, it was considered the most powerful European nation. Today, the US is in a rapid state of disintegration fuelled by mass immigration and the doctrines of multiculturalism/cultural relativism.
So what happened exactly and when did it happen? The story is quite similar to Europe. The Marxists, through applying the doctrines of the Frankfurt school, disguised their ideology and were perceived as “cultural Marxists”, humanists and liberals. Just like in Europe, they gradually contributed to transform to the cultural Marxist/multiculturalist bastion it is today. Most of the methods used are covered already but I will include a few factors not yet mentioned.
The day when the Democrats and Republicans decided that America should no longer be a Christian and a European country “Happy holidays” and “season greetings” you say? What happened to “Merry Christmas”? Traditionally, the only holidays included in the "season" were Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, Boxing Day (in some countries), New Year's Eve, New Year's Day and Three Kings Day. But apparently the US political parties have expanded this term quite recently. Did they ask the American people if they wanted this or did they implement this in an undemocratic manner? Now, thanksgiving, Christmas, Yule, Channukah, Boxing Day, Kwanzaa, and occasionally Ramadan or the Eid depending on the Islamic calendar, to name a few are considered equal to Christmas in the US. Because, suddenly the US didn’t have a state religion. You see, the Democrats and Republicans decided on behalf of all US citizens that the US should no longer a European and Christian country. Instead, they decided, through a multitude of undemocratically implemented bills, that they should create a non-European multicultural nation without a united cultural identity. The people were never allowed to have their say.
Demographical development of the US – Europeans vs. non Europeans This article is not yet complete.
Under construction – not edited 3.101 The cultural Marxist war against God and the Church in Western Europe leads to spiritually bankrupt countries lacking civilizational goals (UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND NOT EDITED, feel free to complete this essay) The greatest achievement in humanity was the moon landing, achieved by our European- American brethren. Since then, cultural Marxism has risen, infiltrated and ravaged both Western Europe and the US. The mass-democracy model of Western Europe has become the norm in the Western world, which has cultivated the principle of mediocrity instead of continuing to pursue excellence.
Marxism is somewhat as crippling as Islam on a civilization so I do not expect we will see a change in direction until we, the conservative visionaries, have seized military and political control. Spiritually bankrupt nations without civilizational visions are nothing more than devastated wastelands of meaningless noise and excessive consumerism, which alone, has no way of satisfying the individuals longing for something greater than the feeding of his or her ego. The cultural Marxist elites of Western Europe will never admit to these facts and they will say that they are in fact allowing Church communities to operate freely. But what kind of Church survived decades of Marxist assault? Firstly, the forced ordination of female priests ravaged the very fundament of the Church, which planted enough Trojans for the European Church to be ridden by internal reforms leading to the Church we see today. The European Labour Church is now completely stripped of any and all influence and has been molded to suit the Marxist agenda. Especially the Protestant Church has been molded into becoming its very own cyanide pill.