STOP ISLAMIFICATION OF EUROPE

ORIGINS
Stop Islamification Of Europe (SIOE) is an alliance of people across Europe with the single aim of preventing Islam becoming a dominant political force in Europe. It originated with the joining of Stop Islamseringen Af Danmark (SIAD) a political party dedicated to stopping the Islamification in Denmark with a loose association of people in England whose rallying cry - "No Sharia Here" who want to maintain English law and stop the creeping growth of sharia law in England.

SIOE is growing in Europe with the amalgamation of similarly minded groups.

AIMS
SIOE exists to legally combat the overt and covert expansion of Islam in Europe. SIOE condemns racism as the lowest form of human stupidity, but considers Islamophobia to be the height of common sense. SIOE states that Islam and democracy are incompatible due to teachings within the Koran itself and some of the hadiths which comprise sharia law. SIOE sees that such incompatibility is self-evident when those tenuous democracies in countries where Islam is the dominant religion are scrutinized. Such 'democracies' have only existed in the post European colonial period, since the end of World War Two.

It has always been the case, but also increasingly so, that in Islamic countries, whether 'democratic' or not, non-Muslims are at best treated as second class citizens, or at worst oppressed. SIOE believes this to be due to the teachings of Islam, which encourages Muslims to feel superior to non-Muslims, and that Islam must prevail over
any other religion and political system, by any means. SIOE finds the concept of 'moderate' Muslims difficult because of the Islamic practises of Taqiyya and Kitman which are designed to deceive and mislead non-Muslims in order to promote the ascendance of Islam over any other religion and political system. Therefore, if a political party's leaders and members may be accused of lying and their policies challenged, then so should a religion's, especially
Islam, which considers lying to be not only acceptable, but obligatory in the furtherance of its doctrine.

Furthermore, SIOE wants all religions to be treated in law the same way as political parties, with no special legal protection. This should apply especially to Islam because it is a combined political, legal and judicial system administered and overseen by un-elected theologians, completely contrary to Western concepts of democracy. This is why democracy is failing in Islamic countries and giving way to Islamic theocracy. SIOE considers that those Western politicians, journalists, academics and social groups, who support Islam, are deliberately misleading Europeans as to the nature of Islam. This is particularly evident in the non-reporting of Islamist atrocities around the world, but also in the re-writing of history to portray Islam in a favourable light as a non-aggressive religion.

SIOE reflects the attitude of most people in Europe that Islam is being favoured above indigenous European cultures and that Muslims are being selectively protected by politicians and lawyers at the expense of non-Muslims who often find themselves unprotected. SIOE challenges the funding by Saudi Arabia for the building of mosques and other Islamic institutions in Europe and elsewhere around the world, when that country outlaws religions other than Islam, politics other than Islam and legislature other than Islam. Such asymmetric funding must be stopped. No more mosques until we see churches in Mecca.

REASONS TO MAINTAIN OUR HARDFOUGHT DEMOCRACY
"ENOUGH IS ENOUGH" is the rallying cry of all liberty-loving Europeans who are tired of seeing their values and ways of life eroded. Arguably, more than any other continent, Europe has suffered most to achieve its present happy condition of liberal democracy. Centuries of international conflicts and civil wars, most notably of course the two world wars of the 20th century, were endured by the ordinary folk of Europe. However, conflict, strife and warfare are not the preserve of Europe. The USA suffered its own civil war; China and Russia are still staggering out of the rubble of revolution down the rocky road to democracy.

Out of the centuries of Europe's internal strife blossomed the Renaissance and Enlightenment, which in turn bore the fruits of democracy. Freethinking men and women fashioned this fragile, imperfect political system, with its many nuances, which nevertheless survives and grows because of its intrinsic fairness and popularity. Democracy in turn released those lucky people enjoying its benefits, to form the most medically, scientifically and artistically productive part of the world we call 'The West'. Many of the West‚s achievements have come in the period since the Second World War, and its people determinedly defended their hard earned principles of democracy and freedom against the totalitarian doctrine of Communism. In winning both World War Two and the Cold War, the West defeated two of its
greatest enemies, one the European cancer of Nazism, the second the contagion of Communism.

Unfortunately, the existence of both has led to the adoption in modern political parlance of the fatuous terms 'left' and 'right.' Even more unfortunately, in Europe at least, 'left' has misleadingly come to mean 'good' and 'right' to mean 'bad'. The table of political oppression is a round one, at which the power-ravenous 'right' and 'left' sit shoulder-to-shoulder, gnawing the bones of freedom's cadaver. Rational people know these truths.

Totalitarianism is the antithesis of liberty. Theocracy is the antipathy of democracy.

OUR OWN POLITICIANS, POLICE AND JUDGES ARE THE DANGER
So why have rational people allowed irrationality to rule? It is because the main danger to liberal democracy is its inherent liberalism, which opens itself to being hijacked by self-styled liberals. A Nazi will punch you for the good of the state. A Communist will kick you for the good of the state. A liberal will do both while shaking your hand
and telling you it‚s for your own good. Rational people recognise that the only liberality self-styled 'liberals' indulge in, is liberally banning everything they disagree with. Lamentably, top of the banning agenda is free speech.

Understandably, because of the events of World War Two and also our colonial past, Europeans have become wary of persecuting minority groups. This has led to Europeans encouraging people from around the world to settle in Europe and to share the benefits of Western ideals. However, this laudable intention has been usurped, not only by some of the groups of people coming to Europe, but worse still by self-loathing, guilt-laden politicians not only of the 'liberal' persuasion, but also capitalist free-marketeers. Such people have inculcated themselves into positions of power. Together, they undermine our ways of life, stifle dissent from their diktats and spread feelings of political remoteness and hopelessness among the majority of European people. This is exactly the kind of totalitarianism we fought against in World War Two and the Cold War.

SO WHAT‚S THE DIFFERENCE?
So what is different about the present battle (some describe it as a war)? This time around the struggle is against a theocratic totalitarianism called Islam. The very fact that it is a theocracy, in other words a religion, protects Islam from being challenged. Political constitutions (written or otherwise) across the West enshrine the principle of freedom to religious practise. Therefore, religions may not be attacked in the same way as political parties. In the West, politicians and their parties come under continuous verbal and written onslaughts in the media regarding their policies, performance and personnel. Religious practise, however, is protected. Despite this, Christianity, Europe‚s main religion, has constantly been ridiculed, criticised and condemned, more often than not with impunity.
This is because Christianity is an easy target, mainly due to the fact that calling for Christian heretics to be killed is deemed more than unacceptable by Christian clergy, and actually killing heretics contravenes laws drawn up by democratically elected legislators.

Certainly leaving Christianity, or any other religion besides Islam, does not merit any punishment, in this world at least. As we all know, this is not the case with Islam‚s sharia law, which stipulates a death sentence for apostates leaving Islam for any reason. Until recently, religion has been put in its place in Western society. It has become a matter of one‚s own personal belief and private conscience. For generations, offending a religious person has not been regarded as being more than bad manners. One of the fundamental benefits in the West is the right to offend and be offended. Religion has not been a threat to society and the clergy has not formulated legislation in the West, although it has been allowed to lobby the various elected governments.

All this is changing due to the imposition of Islam. No other religion demands more from those who do not adhere to its doctrine. This would not be a problem in the West, if our leaders actually stood up for Western values and insisted that Muslims live within our laws and accepted our cultures and social systems. Instead, it is we who are told we must abandon our values, cultures and societies in order not to offend Muslims. It is Islam that is being rammed
down our throats and the throats of our children. It is not only in the West that Islam is causing misery and mayhem. All around the world Islam is battling the 'infidels'. In response all our politicians, journalists, social commentators and religious leaders do is avoid mentioning the murderous activities in places like Indonesia, Thailand and sub-Saharan Africa. However, if an Israeli soldier so much as farts within earshot of a Palestinian mosque the whole
world knows about it within minutes and politicians resoundingly condemn Israel. Such sanctimonious, selective conscience is contemptible and Europeans are fed up with being oppressed for the sake of what most believe to be the most corrosive and intolerant political system ever devised.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!