WE CAN DO SOMETHING - WE DO NOT HAVE TO SIT AND BEMOAN OUR FATE.

WE CAN DO SOMETHING - WE DO NOT HAVE TO SIT AND BEMOAN OUR FATE.

Posted by Gandalf -Up Pompeii

http://uppompeii1.uppompeii.com

What to do, what to do, we have all uttered these words sometimes in sheer desparation or anger, we feel powerless, we no longer feel that we have any say in the future of our country and when frustrations in the public reach this level then dangerous times are afoot.

Dangerous times but for who, not for the Muslim but most certainly for the average member of the public who dares to make his or her feelings known because they are the ones who will be brought to book.

Joe Public in the UK is the most observed specimen in the Human Race, we are the most recorded, monitored and controlled group of people in the world, we are also guilty of a crime before we have committed any and can be arrested if a Policeman "thinks" we are going to commit some felony.

Political correctness and Multi-culturalism is the bedrock that our Skinneresque manipulations are based on, needless to say that the Minorities within our land are effectively exempt from this bizarre social engineering excercise.

There is however a fairly large light at the end of the tunnel and we can emerge from this nightmare realively unscathed if we are strong enough to take action.There exists legal tools that we can use to reclaim our culture and country but we MUST use them.

They are:


The EU precedent :

That has now been set confirming that Italy's action in expelling people who are a danger to the country (Undesireables) is within EU law.

Legal recourse for the risk posed by groups of people within a country to that country.This was made clear by a very clever Swiss International Lawyer: see precautionary principle.The following is from his address at the counter Jihad conference:

Section 8:1 of the Rights of Indigenous peoples (European Union)

The Risk

"Therefore the solution lays in a legal approach that can overcome the absence of
any link between the cause and effect.
This is where the precautionary principle can be most useful. It is based on the
theory of risk instead of tort.

It has been set up to face the difficulties of assessing the cause and effect link
when science doesn’t have enough “back focus” to ascertain such a link. It refers
to situations creating a risk for environment or health safety, and creates the
duty of the one who generates the risk to take all due precaution in order to
avoid it as much as he can or to suffer the consequences of the side effects, even
if no link with the cause can be proved.

To make it legally possible, the precautionary principle prescribes a shift in the
burden of proof on the shoulder of the one who has created the risk. He will have
to prove that is has taken enough and adequate precaution pertaining to the risk
he has created.

Risk-generators are considered as responsible people, responsible citizens. They
can innovate, no doubt; but they take their direct and full share liability in case of
a catastrophe. And they have to pay even in advance for that.

This is altogether one of the main grounds for what is called sustainable
development. For us the question could be: What about sustainable democracy
based on the precautionary principle as well?

In our case, the solution would be to extend the precautionary principle from
environment and health safety to the safety of democracy.

If a doctrine is aimed at propagating the negation of democracy by subversive
means as well as criminal ones, this could be considered as the creation of a risk
per se, couldn’t it? The accumulation of Islamic capital punishments in the news
is enough to conclude: yes.

The solution would then to offer a deal to the disseminators of islam, preachers or
even mere publishers, that we could formulate to the said disseminators as
follows:

“- Islam, as a legal doctrine, which can be understood as compulsory in many of
its prescriptions, not only as a parallel system to the rule of law, but as one
superior to it, creates a risk of side effects through criminal acts and subversion.
- In order to prevent such a risk, your duty is to neutralize such mandatory effect
by stipulating officially, that although given to the knowledge of the followers for
religious purpose, those prescriptions stand below the rule of law and should
never be followed when contradicting it. If you do so, you will be officially
recognized as a reliable citizen and even helped an subsidized.

- If you don’t, based on the freedom to practice your religion freely, you won’t be
banned to continue to propagate such a doctrine but you will have to bare the full
responsibility for any side effect and to contribute to a special fund (like the oil
companies) set up to finance any damages caused as a result of those side
effects or meant to prevent them.

The burden of proof will be reversed and it will
be your liability to prove that based on the due steps you have taken, this could
never happened from your activity, speech or mere influence.”
In a nutshell: you neutralize the risk by warning about the illegality of
prescriptions that can be easily listed or you will bare the corresponding liability
and become taxable.

Section 8:1 of the Rights of the Indiginous population

Article 8.1:"Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture" 8.2:" states shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of , and redress for: (a) "any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities"(b)"any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources"(c) "any form of forced population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights"(d)"any form of forced assimilation or integration"(e)"any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them"


So we are not without recourse, we can "do" something we can if we all pull together, achieve the outcomes we want.

This is not much you may say, that maybe the case but it is a starting point, it is a move away from continuous punching of keyboards and just bemoaning our fate, we now have tools and we must make sure that they are used, we must use section 8:1 wherever we get the chance, if a Mosque is planned somewhere then we identify the risks it will generate and claim the financial costs of meeting that risk from the people who present it.

We must also lobby our politicians (yes I know what you are saying) to make sure they apply the new EU precedent.This is where I feel we must start being pro-active, the use of all of these tools will I think yeild great rewards, it will not happen overnight but if we persist and persist and persist then we will achieve.

Gandalf