The European Union and “Beautiful” Minarets
Inspired by Bat Ye’or’s groundbreaking work Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, I wrote my own book Defeating Eurabia in 2008. My conclusion back then, which still stands today, was that the European Union constitutes a threat to the entire European continent and needs to be dismantled:
“The EU has accepted that the Union should be enlarged to include the Muslim Middle East and North Africa. The EU has accepted that tens of millions of immigrants from predominantly Muslim countries in northern Africa should be allowed to settle in Europe in the years ahead. This is supposedly ‘good for the economy.’ It is planning to implement sharia laws for the millions of Muslims it is inviting to settle in Europe. It has passed stronger anti-racism laws while making it clear that ‘Islamophobia’ constitutes a form of racism, and is cooperating with Islamic countries on rewriting school textbooks to provide a ‘positive’ image of Islam to European children. Finally, the EU is developing an Arrest Warrant which stipulates that those charged with serious crimes, for instance racism, can be arrested without undue interference of the nation state they happen to live in. In essence, the EU is formally surrendering an entire continent to Islam while destroying established national cultures, and is prepared to harass those who disagree with this policy. This constitutes the greatest organized betrayal in Western history, yet is hailed as a victory for ‘tolerance.'”
Those who still believe that Eurabia is a merely “conspiracy theory” should take a closer look at how European authorities handled the Swiss ban on the building of minarets, which constitute a visible symbol of Islamic supremacy. For example, the Ottoman Turks used the minaret as one of the elements to visually appropriate conquered Byzantine churches and convert them to mosques. The ancient Bulgarian town of Nessebar was a part of the First and Second Bulgarian Empires from the seventh to the fourteenth century AD and saw the creation of numerous medieval churches. Yet like the rest of the Balkans it experienced centuries of steep cultural and economic decline following the Turkish Muslim conquests.
This is described in The Byzantine Legacy in Eastern Europe, edited by Lowell Clucas. Although many churches were destroyed or converted into mosques during the conquests, some survived. Under favorable conditions, old churches could be restored or even a few new ones built, although this goes against sharia. However, (page 61), “The physical smallness of these churches is a correct gauge of the general status enjoyed by Christianity within the Ottoman Empire. It is also a correct gauge of the economic power of its patrons: a modest Christian middle class and generally small monastic communities.” The official prohibition of the use of bells was strictly enforced in all but the most peripheral areas under Ottoman rule as the Turks loathed the sound of bells. The Byzantine Legacy in Eastern Europe, page 68:
“According to other, popular Islamic beliefs, bells were thought to attract evil spirits, or to keep angels away. Not only was there a strict policy forbidding their use, but there were evidently continuous efforts at complete eradication of bells. The few surviving examples of medieval bells have been preserved, it would seem, because they were buried to protect them from the Turkish purges. The general Turkish attitude toward bells, and the resulting policy prohibiting their use, left an imprint on Orthodox church architecture. Turkish wrath was directed not solely against bells, but also against architectural features associated with them – belfries. Their highly visible presence on a city’s skyline must have been perceived by the Moslems as an unwanted competition with their minarets. Dismantling of belfries, therefore, became a norm. Archaeological work on churches throughout the territory once held by the Byzantine empire suggests that many more once had belfries than is now apparent. Indeed, the few preserved examples of belfries, particularly among urban churches, did survive only because they were adapted for minarets by the Turks.”
Following the liberation of the Balkan states from Turkish rule, much larger churches and cathedrals were built in southeastern Europe, from Skopje to Sofia. In Athens, the capital of liberated Greece, a new Orthodox Cathedral was built between 1842 and 1862, using marble from 72 demolished churches. Inside are colorful Byzantine-style frescoes and the tombs of two saints killed by the Turks: Saint Philothei (1522-1589) is honored for ransoming Greek women who had been enslaved in Turkish harems. Gregory V, Patriarch of Constantinople, was hanged and thrown into the Bosphorus in 1821 during the Greek uprising.
The skyline of Bulgaria’s capital city Sofia is dominated by the magnificent Alexander Nevsky Cathedral, one of the largest Eastern Orthodox cathedrals in the world whose construction began in 1882 and was designed by the Russian architect Alexander Pomerantsev (1849-1918). Its 45 meters gold-plated dome is only slightly smaller than that of the famous Hagia Sophia in Constantinople. St. Mark’s Church in the center of Belgrade, Serbia, was built in the 1930s and is among the tallest Orthodox churches in the Balkans.
The old regulations used in the Balkans to subdue non-Muslims are now being exported to Western Europe, for instance in Britain in 2010, because of Muslim immigration. According to Islamic law, dhimmis – primarily Jews and Christians under the “protection” of the Islamic state – are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, to ring church bells or display crosses, recite the Torah or Gospels aloud or to make public display of their funerals and feast days because this offends Muslims living in the area. As Robert Spencer writes in Stealth Jihad:
“On October 13, 1999, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Izmir, Turkey, Giuseppe Germano Bernardini, warned the Synod of European Bishops about a ‘clear program’ among Muslims for the ‘re-conquest’ of Europe. ‘During an official meeting on Islamic-Christian dialogue,’ he wrote, ‘an authoritative Muslim person, speaking to the Christians participating, at one point said very calmly and assuredly: ‘Thanks to your democratic laws we will invade you; thanks to our religious laws we will dominate you.’ This domination, he continued, has already begun – ‘with the ‘petro-dollars,’ used not to create work in the poor North African or Middle Eastern countries, but to build mosques and cultural centers in Christian countries with Islamic immigration, including Rome, the center of Christianity. How can we ignore in all of this a clear program of expansion and re-conquest?’ Bernardini also recorded one Muslim’s piquant expression of Islamic supremacism: ‘During another Islamic-Christian meeting, always organized by Christians, a Christian participant publicly asked the Muslims present why they did not organize at least once a meeting of this kind. The Muslim authority present answered the following words: ‘Why should we? You have nothing to teach us and we have nothing to learn.'”
Spencer warns that “Through massive immigration and official dhimmitude from European leaders, Muslims are accomplishing today what they have tried but failed to do for over a millennium: conquer Europe.”
They are actively aided in this undertaking by European authorities. The Council of Europe, in close cooperation with the EU, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the Arab League and other Islamic organizations, is working to combat “Islamophobia” in Europe by all means necessary. In February 2010, a few months after the referendum that banned minarets in Switzerland, COJEP International and EMISCO (European Muslim Initiative for Social Cohesion) with the support of the Council of Europe and the OIC launched a contest to select the most beautiful existing minaret in Europe. According to them, mosques have become a “permanent addition” to our urban landscapes that Westerners should get used to:
“It is however unfortunate, that lately some populist politicians and a section of media has made minarets an issue to curtail fundamental rights. This has resulted in attacks on ethnic and religious minorities and spreading of hate crimes against Muslim people in Europe. It is therefore important that the universal peaceful presence of Islam is visible and its followers are able to practice their religion openly as is the case with other religions. This photo contest is also intended to remove the misplaced fears and prejudices in European societies that Islam and Muslims undermine the Western values and cultures.”
The winners will be presented at a press conference to be held at the European Parliament on the 20th of April 2010. An exhibition of the most beautiful pictures of minarets and mosques will be held at the Council of Europe later this year. As we have seen, a minaret is a symbol of Islamic supremacy and dominance over non-Muslims. The EU Parliament will thus hail the “most beautiful” symbol of the Islamic colonization of Europe and the subjugation of the native population of an entire continent to Islamic rule. There can be no better reminder of the fact that the European Union is not just an active collaborator in the destruction of European civilization, but in some ways arguably its main engine. The only long-term solution to this problem is to permanently end Muslim immigration to all Western nations, to abolish and dismantle organizations such as the EU and the CoE and to get rid of Multiculturalism.