Daily Stormer The Most Censored Publication in History
Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
January 11, 2014
French writer Renaud Camus has stated that the liberal attacks on religion are in fact a means by which to give way to a Muslim takeover of Europe.
This relates to the comments I made yesterday regarding the liberals seeming inability to acknowledge that the Muslims they are intent on flooding White nations with share none of their values, and are in fact more opposed to them than we “fascists.”
From Camus’ interview with Boulevard Voltaire:
A decree of the administrative court of Paris, referring to the law of 1905 on the separation of church and state, prohibits ringing the church bells in the village of Boissettes from 1 January onwards. A new attack on the roots of France?
Of course. Secularism is the Trojan horse of the Muslim conquest, which is the limit, if you think about it. As for equality, and to stay with the Trojan metaphor, it is our beautiful Helen, of whom Aeschylus said: “She has destroyed the walls, the ships, the men.” Equality and secularism are the two enemies of the interior, for the town*. If we give them free reign, they will let nothing of the nation remain. Secularism, as it is now understood, is also just a variant of equality. Each time that in one rare gesture of resistance we refuse something to the Muslims, equality and secularism, in a single voice, demand that it is also refused to Christians and Jews, even if the first, at least, have enjoyed it for fifteen centuries. In this game, Islam always wins: it wins when it wins and it also wins when it loses, because what it’s getting ready to replace, and already has replaced to a large extent, has to pull back just as much. If we don’t want calls of the muezzin, do we need to stop our church bells?
No nation, no people, no civilisation can survive if they continually submit in this suicidal fashion to the aberrant rule that there is equality, in their heart, between that which constitutes their essence and that which undermines it: between the friend and the enemy, between the indigene and the conqueror, between the replaced and the replacer, between the citizen and the non-citizen, or very simply between self and non-self. To which, of course, the replacists and diversity-mongers reply that the nation has no essence, that it is whatever we want it to be, a geographical expression, a hotel, an administrative stamp. For my part, I insist that our only lifeline is to draw up a charter of what is French and what isn’t (as for the language) and to ferociously refuse any equality between this and that: between church bells and muezzins, between churches and mosques, between hair in the wind and Islamic veils, between faces and letterboxes.
Translation via Islam Versus Europe.
