Friday, July 11, 2008

Lisbon, Multicultural Portugal, 10th July 2008

Afonso Henriques, who is Portuguese and a frequent commenter here at Gates of Vienna, just sent us this report (edited slightly for spelling and clarity):

Many commenters — and Dymphna and Baron — both Europeans or Americans, have said that the European peoples are defenseless because they have no right to bear arms. Fire weapons that is.

Ok, that is true. The debate has been great and constant here over this.

But I have one thing to show you:


Do you know where it happened?

Bolivia? Venezuela? Mexico? Colombia?
- - - - - - - - -
No. It happened in Western Europe, Portugal, just at the outskirts of Lisbon, the city that would lend its name to the Lisbon Treaty.

I must tell you that Portugal is considered the most “safe” country in Europe.

What you saw was a confrontation between a coalition of gypsies and blacks (at least fifty individuals) against a rival group of blacks. You can see they are heavily armed and you can see that they are fighting in a urban area like some of the Taliban fought in Kabul, with total impunity. Only one man was arrested, a man that was arrested two days earlier as well.

I’d say these ethnic minorities already do have weapons of war; it’s easy to get them on the black market all over Europe. They are still only fighting each other, but considering that the general population (the Europeans) are disarmed and the police care less and less about our security (as the events at Gare du Midi have so shockingly demonstrated), when will this war be directed against us?

You know, our cars are still the best, our wallets are still the heaviest, our women are still the most attractive to be raped and our children are still the more prone to be beaten or robbed. Do you really think that their arsenal will not turn against us?

My premise is that if the poorest people can manage to have war weapons in Europe, the European people (much richer) can import weapons as well, and easier. That is not really a problem.

I have also to say that these events may well take place once a week or twice a month in some areas here… and Portugal is a much “safer” country than any other Western European country.

To readers who know something about guns: what sorts of weapons are these people using?

Update: Alma, a Latin American reader who understands Portuguese, sends us additional information based on the news broadcast and the information accompanying the video:

Two rival gangs in the neighborhood of Quenta da Fonte in Lourdes, Portugal… The newsman said that the gangs have done this before in this neighborhood. The police cordoned off the area in order to control the area & for the paramedics to be able to enter.

This report shows two shootouts. Also, these were really short range shootouts, from the looks of it.

The newsman said there had been one arrest, but the text on the YouTube says there were two detained. Two males, aged 24-25 bearing automatic pistols 9mm and 7.5mm and dozens of rounds of ammunition.

The previous evening a dispute between neighbors became an all-out fight leaving nine wounded.

The shootouts are very “sporadic”.

This neighborhood houses some 2,500 people of varying ethnicities who were relocated there after their old neighborhoods were torn down for the road access to Expo 98.

Most of the residents are socially & economically disadvantaged & on welfare. The neighbohood has frequent muggings robberies and businesses are broken into often por parte de jovens (by youths).

Alma adds:

Those damn “youths” are everywhere.

69 comments:

Afonso Henriques said...

Thank you very much for posting Baron, really.
I just can stop being a bit sad for not being capable of being at Gates of Vienna more often this week and the next one but I'll make an extra effort to comment this if someone wants some enlightments that I can provide.

Thank you very much.

José, The Fenec. said...

I'm shocked with this, it's worse than i tought in Lisbon! It's already a full blown muticultural place. This should be a wake up call here to the dangers of multicultural imposed societies.

I still think most of the country is not like this, but it sure is fast on it's way to worse... And it's not even muslims! I believe that conflicts beteween muslims and gipsies have occured in France, but here were africans and gipsies, NO ISLAM INVOLVED, just like in USA there's gangs of hispanics.

It's becoming clear that it's not just an ideology/theology that's threatening Europe.

vince said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
vince said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
vince said...

Here is a an excellent pieace by the thoughtful and fearless Jared Talor on the issue.

Is a Multicultural Nation Possible?

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2008/07/is_a_multiracia.php


Apart from that, why on earth does a not-so-rich country like portugal, attract non-western immigrants?
I heard that there is an immigration agreement between Brazil and Portugal, and Brazilians can move easily to Portugal. Can Afonso confirm it? Because if it's true that's a real tragedy. In a short time all the blacks and mulattoes of the favelas will populate Lisbon and Porto.

no2liberals said...

Baron,
Your question as to what type of guns were used; the picture quality was poor, so the handguns could be almost anything. The long guns all appeared to be semi-auto or pump action shotguns. One appeared similar to the Benelli M4, but it also resembled a Franchi-Spas shotgun made back in the late 80's early 90's.
To be honest, all these men seemed to be rank amateurs. That doesn't mean they aren't lethal, just that they don't have any tactical skills. It seems to me to be an emotionally charged event, not a professional assault. Perhaps a member of one group insulted or dishonored a member of the other group. That they would resort to lethal force, on a busy street, in broad daylight, without a strategy, tells me they are dangerous, and aren't concerned with consequences.
For a reference point for the readers here, here are the rules for a gunfight. View them, then view the video again, and I think it's obvious this was a personal attack, not an organized gang war.
Afonso, your concern is legitimate, if the illegally armed members of society decide to prey on the unarmed. Yes, your honest citizens could arm themselves illegally, but are less inclined to do so, as the penalties are generally too high a price to pay for a decent citizen. What the criminals think of a prison sentence, compared to what they are prepared to do with the gun, is of minor importance. Without the laws of your country allowing private ownership, and legitimate use, the criminals will only become more emboldened. While the police do wish to protect society, their number one job each day is to safely return home to their families.
Personal defense is a serious responsibility, and the governments of most European countries seem to have abandoned it's citizens, in this regard.
It's best to start training when young.

John Sobieski said...

The thugs have weapons, the Europeans do not. Sounds a lot like what they tried to do in American cities. Thank God the individual right to bear arms was upheld. I'm not sure what Europeans can do.

Baron Bodissey said...

no2liberals --

Thanks for your expert opinion. I knew some of our firearms specialists would have something to say. :)

Bilgeman said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
no2liberals said...

Baron,
Henh...you asked.
My approach, had I been the one organizing the attack, would have been to assign each long gun to several with handguns, and attack from the front with two groups, providing cover for the third group to flank the opponent, using the handguns for volume of fire and cover while the long gun reloaded.
But...that's just me.
As an unarmed citizen, I would have run like Jesse Owens.

leadpb said...

That "rules for a gunfight" link rocks!

Zenster said...

No2Lib, I saw that set of "rules" many years ago and absolutely nothing has offered up any evidence to change my mind about them.

Anyone who is afraid of using a firearm should not own one. Anyone who owns a gun must be ready to use it or be a victim, no other options apply. NEVER EVER point a gun at someone (loaded or not, safety on or off), if you are not just as ready to pull the trigger.

Remember, guns don't kill people ... BULLETS DO.

Gun control means using BOTH HANDS.

One_of_the_last_few_Patriots_left said...

The Baron wrote: "To readers who know something about guns, what sorts of weapons are these people using?"

Baron, as you know, guns are not nice, guns are bad, guns are icky. It would be not nice to admit knowing something about guns.

Now, then... the first THUG... oops, uh, I mean "undocumented immigrant who is enriching the culture" appears to be using something like an HK/Benelli M1 Super 90 shotgun. Although the video is grainy, you will note that the shotgun has black synthetic furniture and a seperate pistol grip and buttstock, and an extended magazine. Several manufacturers, both in the US and in Europe, manufacture combat shotguns in this configuration so it is not possible to determine with certainty the make and model from such a grainy video taken from a long distance.
Later in the video there appear to be several longarms which look, from a distance, like pump action or semiautomatic shotguns with "coventional" wooden stocks.
There are several "blue steel" semiautomatic pistols seen in the video (actually, in this day and age, they could be any of several different "industrial grade" surface finishes that are dark in color) and at least one "white" colored pistol (electroless nickel/hard chrome/stainless steel.) All of these pistols are of substantial size which implies a locked-breech selfloader firing a cartridge such as 9mm Parabellum. Although the 9mm Parabellum round is virtually ubiquitous in Europe, other rounds are in use; the report mentions a "7.5" They probably mean a 7.65mm Parabellum ( also sometimes called ".30 Luger" here in the US. )
Because the video has been spliced and edited and was not clear to begin with, it is not entirely clear to me how many different people we are looking at , but my best guess is 2 or 3 pistols and perhaps 3 shotguns.
Although European laws pertaining to legal gun ownership vary quite a bit, they are generally quite draconian; until we find otherwise, we must assume that the miscreants obtained their weapons on the black market.

One_of_the_last_few_Patriots_left said...

Oooops! Typo: lines 14-15 should read
"... shotguns with 'CONVENTIONAL' wooden stocks."

Afonso Henriques said...

Well Baron, the MSM here reported that there were used "rifles", "automatic weapons", "shotguns" and "revolvers".

Some revolvers may be legal, as well as some rifles which only need a haunt license, but I don't see this people killing birds...
By the way, only the low caliber revolvers are legal. Any kind of shotgun and automatic weapons is illegal here. However, many Portuguese men (some 5%) have G3's. They hae it because during the revolution in the mid 70s, the Communists distributed arms to the people. Or just because during the same period they left the army with the weapons...

I just wanted to add two cents on the update:

"The shootouts are very “sporadic”."

Actually, the inhabitants of the neighbourhood claimed, when intreviewd, that shootouts are rather frequent in this neighbourhood. And also, it is evident that the video shows only one side of the battle (the invaders), the video was made from someone's window...

Afonso Henriques said...

Vince, why we atract immigrants is because we are members of a Civilisation/racial group that shall not have an exclusive home place.

Why we atract so many immigrants being so poor is a mistery to me.
We had the first, for one century the bigger, and long lasting European Colonial Empire; we were at war with half of Africa in three fronts from 1961 untill 1974 (and we managed to do quiet well, if you take in consideration our size and the performance of the other colonial powers) and as so, some member of our elite feel we have a "Historical Responsability" towards the third world, especially Africa, and that we must be a "Entering Door for non European Cultures into Europe".

I agree that we are in debt with Africans, but those Africans who fought for the Portuguese Empire against their own compatriots. But what the post revolutionary elites have done was to get the Portuguese out of Africa (one million of them, 10% of us) and give the new states in the hand of the guerilhas. The blacks who fought alongside the Portuguese were abandoned by them and were killed and tortured en mass.
Nowaday, our elite thnk that we have to emend this error by inviting those who did wanted to see us out of Africa and their grandsons into our lands.

Then we have big cultural ties with Brazil (our America) and Eastern Europeans come here to work. Also, the Indians and Middle Easterners must love our beaches or something...

Concerning the Brazilians, yes its true that exist. But... the European Union did not alowed to make what our governments wanted: to make a free zone for movement of peoples and goods across Portugal and Brazil. (thank God!) And for now, Brazil is still a refuge area for corrupt Portuguese people who want to escape from the police.

"In a short time all the blacks and mulattoes of the favelas will populate Lisbon and Porto."

There are between 70 to 100 thousand legal Brazilians here (the number may be up to 200000). And though some 24% of our prisions is composed of "Latin American peoples" I think Brazilian immigration is one of the best kind of immigration. Because some Brazilians are really Portuguese living in Brazil with a funny accent. To them, (ususally the elite) the cultural schocks are few and in one generation they are indistinguishble from the rest. Of course, there are the lower strta but we should profile who enters here or not.

There are Brazilians who came here to become true Portuguese, to blend in, like "returning to the origins", and there are those who make videos in Youtube with their face covered stating that they are here to destroy the country, because the Portuguese have made Brazil a asswhole and because we enslaved their ancestors. And of course, we have all the others in between.

Afonso Henriques said...

No2liberals

I agree with you and I must say to the last Patriot that unfortunetly, more likely it is that all this people have Portuguese Nationality.

no2liberals said...

Zenster,
In all the years I have referred to those rules, I only disagree with one, and that is I believe the .45ACP to be a consistent man-stopper, especially with Hydrshok rounds or frangibles.

Baron and Afonso,
After considering the video once more, and a good nights sleep, I now realize I know nothing about the actions or numbers of the opposing group, and so I do not know how I would have approached the situation. As has now been mentioned, rifles and revolvers were used, I did not see any of those weapons in the hands of the men in the video, so I must assume the other group was the one using them.
As to the group shown being identified as Gypsies, perhaps it is different in Portugal, but historically in the U.S., Gypsies aren't generally citizens, refusing to apply for the most basic of documents, birth certificates, and subsequently, all other documents of citizenship.
If the Gitanos in Portugal are not citizens, then any firearm they possess will be illegal.
I wish I knew Portugese, so I could have understood what they were saying in the video. The extent of my exposure to Portugese, over the years, has been limited to listening to Milton Nascimento.

One_of_the_last_few_Patriots_left said...

Afonso Henriques wrote: "There are Brazilians who came to be true Portuguese, to blend in, like "returning to the origins", and there are those who make videos in Youtube with their face covered stating that they are here to destroy the country, because the Portuguese have made Brazil a asswhole and because we enslaved their ancestors."

Afonso! I am amazed (although I suppose I should not be) that even Portugal has a "Professional Victim class / Grievance Industry!" In other words, people who make a living by complaining quite loudly about all the injustices visited upon their ancestors. Can you imagine people (loudmouths) like The Reverend Jesse Jackson or the Reverend Al Sharpton actually having a REAL job? No, it is much more lucrative to complain about how "racist" America is, then guilty white liberals will give them money$$$.
( Hmmm... say, how do I get to be a "Reverend?" )
Here in the US we also have LaRaza, an organization of Mexicans whose stated goal is to take all of the Southwest away from the US to create the nation of "New Aztlan." I wonder how many Americans they intend to MURDER to achieve their goal? The fact that you have similar miscreants in Portugal just shows how low Western Civilization has sunk, and, as we have seen, they are able to obtain weapons and are willing ( even eager ) to use violence.

Afonso Henriques said...

No2liberals,

Concerning the number of people there, there has been some divergences. The MSM have already said that a) there was at least fifty people on both sides of the confrontations and b) that at least fifty people invaded the neighbourhood. Strategically, I do not believe that the shooting was only in this street from which we have images. Here we can only see a group of nine or ten men...
and see this.

This is a video about an arrastão that happened in Carcavelo's beach.
15 years ago, this was one of the three most beautifull beaches on the lines of Lisbon, but then multiculturalism popped in and less and less "average" people frequent the beach.
This video is from the extreme left that denies the arrastão really happened. What is funny is that the video shows some newspaper headlines of the following days in which you can read "marginal youths from the outskirts of Lisbon go down South to Algarve to terrify the people at the beach" and "There were 500 people in the arrastão but only 40 or 50 commited acts of violence and robbery".
This had great conotations because this happened in the 10th of June 2005, that is, our 4th July. This was the first action of the type in Portugal, with 500 "youths" involved.
They did this, not only during our 4th July. While they did this, the far right was parading on the centre of Lisbon (and Oporto I guess) protesting against immigration and the process of Nationalisation of persons. This was undoubtedly a organised action as well as a political action (to atack Portuguese in their hollidays in their own 4th July), and I would even say that this is a kind of terrorism.

To know what an arrastão is, it was born in Brazil, in Rio de Janeiro where the blacks are pushing the civilisation into the sea like the muslims are doing to the Jews in the Middle East. Daily life of Rio de Janeiro here , that is an arrastão.

----------------

Historically the gypsies (Ciganos) have been somehow like the Jews but poorer. They were not really citizens and there were always a great pression to ostracize them. Laws were enacted according to each the simple presence of a gypsie in a given town or property would constitute a severe crime passible of death penalty against the Cigano. But the gypsies thrived with their nomadic ways, giving shows and selling products... Nowadays if they have the Portuguese Natinality - that they do - they are Portuguese don't matter what. In rural areas they benefit from all cigano neighbourhood and especial laws, like license to drive three years earlier than the rest, and license to marry thirteen years old girls.
You only need to be in Portugal for six years to be granted Portuguese Nationality.

Afonso Henriques said...

Actually, Last Patriot its not the same here and in the United States.

If so, the group advocating that here is our elite (leftist, of course) who thrive with multiculturalism saying that the Portuguese and the Spaniards are a mix of Jews and Arabs and should not be in Europe. And as so, because our land does not belong to us and have always been a multicultural paradise (hooo!) we must recieve everybody for that and our racist History: The Reconquista and the Conquista. Against the muslims at home and against Africans and Native Americans (and Asians too) abroad.

Because we've been constantly at war against non European peoples since 711 untill 1974, and then we have them at home since 1986 again when we joined the European Union, our elites claim we must pay for our past sins.

The Brazilians and others? That's nothing to due with the U.S.A. you have real threats there. Here this people is just worth of pitty. Immigrants who came after the European El Dorado and have never had so much money in their hands, just to discover they would need to double it to live properly. Here the seriously problems only arise when they feel they are entitled to the land. Equality you know...

Armance said...

In rural areas they benefit from all cigano neighbourhood and especial laws, like license to drive three years earlier than the rest, and license to marry thirteen years old girls.

Well, in Romania, due to the affirmative action measures, they have special places in high schools and universities without exams. During the summer, while the children of the majority learn hard for their examinations, the gypsy kids don't have to worry about this kind of test for their future career and just hang around having a good time and stealing some wallets for fun - or they just go for a trip to Italy to do the same thing. Affirmative action for gypsies was a request and a condition in order to join the European Union. Yet, no matter what we do, we are still racists discriminating against them. More than that, as it was predictable according to the common sense, the affirmative action measures have proved to be completely ineffectual: the gypsies graduate the high school or the college without basic knowledge of spelling the Romanian language and consequently cannot find a job - what serious employer would hire somebody in this situation? But the EU refuses to admit the failure of their policies regarding integration and states that this is further proof of the inherent, hopeless racism of the Romanians. The vicious circle goes on and on...

Mats said...

hey Byron, I am portuguese, and I live in Caxias (20 m from Lisbon). Let me tell you that you can't compare what happened in Quinta da Fonte with what the "youths" are doing in France.
Those things won't be solved with imigration control, and gsypies have been in Portugal for centuries. Black people are fairly new comers.

Anyway, you can't use this example bkz it doesn't fit.

Secondly, neither the gypsies nor those black people want to replace the portuguese way of life and impose their own way of life.

That kind of thing is not that common in Portugal (ethnic groups using such heavy armory) but, yes, there are some tensions between gypsies and blacks

Mats said...

oh, I am 100% anti-multiculturalism, and 1000000000% anti-islamo-fascism, and 100000000% anti-"open-borders"-ism.

Mats said...

One more thing: Brazilian imigrants in portugal fit in quite easily. Ukranians usually don't make problems. Ditto to russians. Gsypsies, as I said already, have been in Portugal for centuries. Blacks do create problems in the periphery, but they are not (yet) ideologically motivated like the muzzies.

no2liberals said...

Afonso,
With the numbers you now have mentioned, my first understanding was a total of fifty people, not fifty on each side. That is a serious engagement. Often in the battles between the Britons and the Saxons, a battle was between forces not much larger than that on each side. If tensions in this neighborhood run this high, expect further such fights, and avoid the area like the plaque...if you don't already.
As for the large number of "youths" disrespecting your Independence Day, and taking away public areas by strength of numbers, and violent intent, your countries problems are immense, and one could say, out of control.
I have no solutions to offer, as the models your country and mine follow are so completely different when it comes to the right to bear arms and self defense, and we don't concern ourselves with the Council of Europe's European Commission against Racism and Intolerance.
The worst crime problems in this country are in areas with the most restrictive gun laws, and I would never live in one of those areas. I live in Texas, where we not only have the right to carry a concealed firearm in our vehicles without a permit, we have a concealed handgun license law, a Castle Doctrine, and hopefully soon, an Open Carry Law. With the numerous restrictions your government, and the EU, place on it's citizens, and the lack of personal rights, I don't know how best to approach your crime or immigrant problems. Though I'm certain there are ways, it may take a very rude awakening for the self-annointed elites in your society, before they change, such as a prominent persons child or family being assaulted or worse.

Afonso Henriques said...

Update: The MSM is reporting a mass exodus of gypsies from that neighbourhood. The MSM say that "one of the ethnicities of the neighbouhood is leaving".

The gypsies have gathered and decided to ask to the Mayor of Loures for an all Gypsy neoghbourhood. The Gypsies have said that they are evacuating "at least all the gypsy children and women" and that they will "give the keys of the gypsy's homes to the municipal authorities".

Black youths stated that "The rebellion will not stop. As long as there is one gypsy here, this will not stop."

Interesting...

Afonso Henriques said...

Mats, you live in Caxias and you say that "is not that common in Portugal (ethnic groups using such heavy armory)"?

Have you seen the intreviews with the inhabitants of the neighbourhood? Come on!!!
I agree with you, this and what happened in France is not the same. I didn't say it is.

"neither the gypsies nor those black people want to replace the portuguese way of life and impose their own way of life."
So you say that Cova da Moura and that new village they made at the exit of Pombal for gypsies only are ruled by "the Portuguese way of life?".

Well, muslims, blacks, gypsies.
Three different cultures, three diferent levels of organisation, the same consequence: The Destruction of Europe.

"(blacks) are not (yet) ideologically motivated like the muzzies."
That is debatable.

Mats said...

Afonso,
My mother is a nurse in the Hospital Prisional de Caxias, and I live close to that "troubled area". Yes, there is a lot of violence, promiscuity, anti-stalishment mood and not a very european way of life. But you have to see this from the general anti-eurabian mood that we all have.

My point is that you can't use this example as the "degradation" of europe (which is happening, no doubt).

I agree with pretty much you said in your reply, so we are not in contention in no point. We just have to focus on the true examples of religiously motivated people who want to stablish their 7th century nonsense in civilized nations.
Remember that the war we are facing is not against a RACE but against an IDEOLOGY. If you frame your opposition on racial terms, you will be tagged as a racist. The ideology we are fighting, surprisingly, it's not only islam, but MULTICULTURALISM.

The things that happened in Qta da Fonte were tensions that, saddly, happen between any two poor comunities (Mexicans vs blacks, anyone?). However, as long as we say that both are wrong, and it's THEIR problem, not ours, we can at least begging to go somewhere.
If we assume that their wars are caused by "us", then the problems begin.

Mats said...

Afonso,



"neither the gypsies nor those black people want to replace the portuguese way of life and impose their own way of life."
So you say that Cova da Moura and that new village they made at the exit of Pombal for gypsies only are ruled by "the Portuguese way of life?".


Do they want to implant that way of lie on US ALL, or do they want to live IN THERE under those conditions ?

Muslims, on the other hand, want to implant desert laws in civilized nations .

Well, muslims, blacks, gypsies.
Three different cultures, three diferent levels of organisation, the same consequence: The Destruction of Europe.

Not true. I know black people who love and want to promote the Judeo-Christian, european lifestyle, but retain the good civilized aspects of their own culture.

There are black people who were born in Portugal who want nothing to do with african culture.
Therefore, you can't compare an IDEOLOGICALLY motivated group (MUSLIMS) with an ethnic group.

Notice that I am not saying that there are no problems among black people. Sure they are. But we can't use this as a banner against immigration to europe.

The war we face is against the idoelogy of multiculturalism and islamism. Anyone who wants to come to europe, wrk hard, and respect the indigenous religion, way of life and democracy, is welcome. Anyone, regardless of race, who wants to force on europeans other ways of life, other costumes and specially other religions, must be legally resisted.

"(blacks) are not (yet) ideologically motivated like the muzzies."
That is debatable.


Well, yes, there can be some "black superiority" nonsense amng some portuguese blacks, but it is not hat massive (yet).

Our problem multiculturalism.

Robert Marchenoir said...

Afonso, your informations are very interesting.

They help us understand that strikingly similar events are happening all over Europe, in quite different countries, in spite of the fact they have a different culture and a different history.

You mentioned that immigrant gangs assaulted Portuguese people on your national holiday.

The very same thing has been happening now for quite a while in France. On the 14th of July's eve, it's better not to be in the streets if you don't want to be robbed or assaulted. Ditto on New Year's Eve.

It's hard to avoid the symbolic significance of this: the first date is when we celebrate our nation. The second is when be celebrate our religion (let's say the New Year festivities are closely related to Christmas).

It's yet another way to signify the host country: we are at war against you. Against your most precious values.

Afonso Henriques said...

No2liberals, I have to say, your system is better than ours. Weapons do free the people from tirany if carried by good citizens.

Concerning the Arrastão with half a thousand youths, I don't know what can be done. If you're not alread sick of watching videos from the mulicultural Portuguese paradise, you can see this one from the present year - I even translated a media piece and tought about sending this to Baron but then I hesitated... The story is that in another beach near Lisbon, the Santo Amaro Beach, two rival groups of blacks met accidentally at the beach, they called their friends and in twenty minutes, another arrastão had happened with some sources saying numbers were as high as one thousand people. Then two policemen patruling the beach were attacked but managed to call back ups and control the human mass by shooting to the air. Nothing too bad happened, only one of the policemen had to go to the hospital after being hit with a bottle of beer in the head.

Robert, you are right. I agree with you but I think things are even worst in France.
The problem is that someone will always say that it never happens, or that has no meaning. See the link, you will easily know who are rioting, just remember that the beach is in Europe. Here is the link to the attack on the National Day once more.

Is that Europe that you want for the future generations?

English Rose said...

Hi Baron,
this is really shocking, our Countrys are being destroyed and there is little we can do about it. I've linked to it on English Rose.

Mats said...

There is something you can do about it, English Rose.

Remember what was the ideological force that kept europe united against islamo-fascism? We need to get back to it ASAP.


Secondly, close down the borders.

Thirdly, expose the European union for what it is, meanigly, a comunist pipe dream under the guise of "union".

Fourthly, make the ties with the USA and Israel stronger, and form a "Anti-Dhimmitude" Aliance between Europe, the USA and Israel.

Basically, be proud of being european and (if that is your case) Christian, and not be ashamed of it.

Joanne said...

Multiculturism does not work; it is an experiment that has gone array. It is rather interesting that is has been nations such as the U.S., Canada, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Britain and western European countries that this has been forced upon. What do they all have in common? They are white, generally Christian countries, and wealthy. If these countries quit handing out welfare to immigrants instead of making them stand on their own two feet and have a job to go to each day, we would all be a lot better off. What do they say about idle hands - nothing good. Stop paying immigrants to live in our countries, either work or shove off.

One_of_the_last_few_Patriots_left said...

Joanne,

"Idle hands do the Devil's work!"

Afonso Henriques said...

Mats,
sorry for being so slow in providing an answer to you, but here we go.

I'm glad you agree with me. However I think I can not say the same, I do think that we diverge in some major aspects.

First of all I find you a little contradictory or even sadistic.
I am a big supporter of the anti-islamic "movement", but not because I dislike Arabs and muslims. I support it because I've analysed the current situation and have came to the conclusion that a Europe filled with muslims is not an advantage.
I support that movement because I have in mind what the muslims will do to Europe (are already doing). The same to everybody else. I don't demonise muslims, as I believe I don't demonise blacks, gypsies, leftsts, marcians or whoever.

I've also noticed how you seem to equate Islamism and the Koran with an ideology only. It is also culture. Take the Koran away from a muslim is to take 90% of his culture away.

You are also a multiculturalist.
You see two foreign ethnic groups adopted by the establishment shooting at each other like they were in Beirute and you say it's not your buisness? Come on! They are turning your own Nation into a Brazilian Favela and it's not your business?

You claim muslims have no right to impose their ways on our people and soil, but you say that blacks (and I believe gypsies and any non muslim people) have the right to impose their ways where they live?
Did you know that the Cova da Moura region, for instance, was once inhabited by Portuguese people? And I do not mean only a Nationality paper. The President of the Portuguese Republic Jorge Sampaio asked the Cape Verde's President if they would give him permission to go to Cova da Moura, a neighbourhood just outside Lisbon, and you say it's not our buisness? Since when a 10 million strong European "power" has to ask permission to a 0,3 million strong African Island to walk safely along it's own capital for more than 500 years? Do you want me to provide a link?

I know people of very ethnicities, and some of them I even consider friends (of course, I usually don't scream how multiculturalism sucks in front of them as I don't scream how ugly fat women are in the company of fat female friends for a matter of education. Though, if any of the groups ask the question, they'll hear the truth, as have already happened), but you still insinuate I am somewhat a racist. From all the Brazilians in our National team, I don't know who I hate the most, if the "brown" Pepe or the blue eyed Scolri, but maybe I am a racist.

Well, so be it. I can tolerate and befriend induviduals of different races and cultures, what I can not do is tolerate them as a group to import their habbits in my country and let them infiltrate into my people.

You see that we are at war with islam, I think we are being attacked fromm all angles by virtually everybody (but the Tibetans, of course).

If you think to oppose islam is to be "superior", to fight a ideological battle, then you're wrong, because from what I could extract from you, you apear to have no reason whatsoever to "fight" islam but one: you don't like muslim people or the muslim religion. That makes you 1) a racist; 2) a religious fanatic.

If you want to fight the good war, you'll have to treat them all the same, and not to apologise non muslim groups when they behave badly or to criminalise muslims for doing lesser gravous "things".

"Anyone who wants to come to europe, wrk hard, and respect the indigenous religion, way of life and democracy, is welcome."

This is pure multiculturalism. No it's even worst, its a cry for immigration. I am against this. Europe is not the bloody New World.
But maybe you still have the illusion that the immigrants who came here are treated as "normal workers"...

Mats said...

Afonso,
No worries in taking long in replies. There is no dead line to follow.


"First of all I find you a little contradictory or even sadistic.
I am a big supporter of the anti-islamic "movement", but not because I dislike Arabs and muslims. I support it because I've analysed the current situation and have came to the conclusion that a Europe filled with muslims is not an advantage.

What about a Europe filled with Arab Christians? If you say "Oh, well, arab christians usually don't create probems", then you genuinely are against the ideology and not the race. HOWEVER if you say thatyou are against arabs/pakistani/whoever BECAUSE they are arabs and pakistani, NOT because they are muslims, then we differ.
I have no problem with them being whatever race they are, as long as they obey the euroipean laws, and as long as we obey the european costumes.

This is not multiculturalism, since multiculturalism says that no culture is better than the other. This is nonsense. A culture that condones wife beating and pedophily is clearly worse than the european culture.

"I support that movement because I have in mind what the muslims will do to Europe (are already doing). The same to everybody else. I don't demonise muslims, as I believe I don't demonise blacks, gypsies, leftsts, marcians or whoever.


But here is where you make the mistake. You can't equate muslims with gypsies, blacks or chinese because being a muslim is not an ethnic group.

I've also noticed how you seem to equate Islamism and the Koran with an ideology only. It is also culture. Take the Koran away from a muslim is to take 90% of his culture away.

The ideology gave rise to the culture.


You are also a multiculturalist.
You see two foreign ethnic groups adopted by the establishment shooting at each other like they were in Beirute and you say it's not your buisness?


I never said it is not our bussness. I say that this isn't a goood example for the purpose of this blog. IT sure is our bussness and those two comunites must obey the law of the land. You forgot one thing in my previous replies: gsypsies are NOT immigrants in Portugal. They have been here for centuries. If they don't obey the law, what will you do to them? Ship them where?

Like I said, you can't use this as a "close down the borders" example.

Come on! They are turning your own Nation into a Brazilian Favela and it's not your business?

Since I never said this is not our bussess, your point here is adead end.


You claim muslims have no right to impose their ways on our people and soil, but you say that blacks (and I believe gypsies and any non muslim people) have the right to impose their ways where they live?

Again, I never said that they have the right to impose that where they live. I said that there is a diference between what the muslims want to do (impose shariah on ALL OF US) with what those groups want to do (create laws to the place they live). I am not saying it is ok (it isn't). I am saying that therein lies the diference.

Did you know that the Cova da Moura region, for instance, was once inhabited by Portuguese people? And I do not mean only a Nationality paper. The President of the Portuguese Republic Jorge Sampaio asked the Cape Verde's President if they would give him permission to go to Cova da Moura, a neighbourhood just outside Lisbon, and you say it's not our buisness?


Why in the world would Sampaio ask permission to go to a portuguese city?!! This is idiotic of him, and I am horrified with that.
HOwever, read what I said above: everyone who wants to live in europe MUST obey the european laws, costumes, religion and way of life, specially those who came here freely.

Since when a 10 million strong European "power" has to ask permission to a 0,3 million strong African Island to walk safely along it's own capital for more than 500 years? Do you want me to provide a link?


No need. I am just as angry as you are. I think you missed the point of my replies.

I know people of very ethnicities, and some of them I even consider friends (of course, I usually don't scream how multiculturalism sucks in front of them as I don't scream how ugly fat women are in the company of fat female friends for a matter of education.


Again, you make a mistake. YOu can't compare being fat (physical property) with multicultalism's bad effects (ideology). It's OK to be against ways of life that don't obey local democratic Judeo-Christian, western costumes.

I wouldn't have no problem at all saying to a portuguese muslim that my culture is superior to his, since this is not racism or "descrimination".

Don't compare being overweighted with having the belief that all cultures are just the same. Those are not on the same level at all.


Well, so be it. I can tolerate and befriend induviduals of different races and cultures, what I can not do is tolerate them as a group to import their habbits in my country and let them infiltrate into my people.


Then you agree with me. I get along with everyone as long as they don't try to shove their 7th century desert laws in our much more advanced and more educated culture.

If you think to oppose islam is to be "superior", to fight a ideological battle, then you're wrong, because from what I could extract from you, you apear to have no reason whatsoever to "fight" islam but one: you don't like muslim people or the muslim religion. That makes you 1) a racist; 2) a religious fanatic.


I don't like islam and I do am a CHristian (don't know what you mean by a "religious fanatic"). However, who in his right mind stays neutral in the face of a culture which condones wife beating, child molestation, and conversions by force? Who in his right mind stays neutral when faced with a culture that says it's ok to kill your own daughter if she refuses to marry the man you apoint?

So if being against such practices makes me a "religious fanatic", then so be it. I would rather be a "religious fanatic" than to be a lukewarm in the presence of evil.

If you want to fight the good war, you'll have to treat them all the same,

I do treat the PEOPLE the same. HOwever, I don't respect religions that condone child molestation. Do you?


"Anyone who wants to come to europe, work hard, and respect the indigenous religion, way of life and democracy, is welcome."

This is pure multiculturalism.

No, it's not, since multi-culty says that no culture is better than the other. I know my culture is superior than the islamic culture, and I expect them to obey my culture when they come to live in my country. If they are not willing, then they should leave or face the consequences.


No it's even worst, its a cry for immigration. I am against this. Europe is not the bloody New World.

So your problem is "immigration" not islam? You are against ANYONE who wants to come to Lisbon, eVEN if he or she is a hard working law abiding citizen? So I guess, you are against the almost 1 million portuguese who live in France? Or perhapos against the almost 50% of the working people in Luxembourg?

If you want to be consistent, you would have to be against immigration AND *E*migration into other lands.

Perhaps you are only against immigration when it is non-portuguese doing it, but you are ok with immigration when it's the portuguese doing it ?

My take on this is: Whoever wants to work hard, be a good citizen, obey the law, the costumes, the traditions and the local religions, is more than welcome. If they doon't like it, then the same way they came by their free will, they can leave by their free will.
But maybe you still have the illusion that the immigrants who came here are treated as "normal workers"...

José, The Fenec. said...

Mats wrote:
"Gsypsies, as I said already, have been in Portugal for centuries."

Indeed they have, and altough some have assimilated you can easely see that some other still live in shacks, keep themselves away from society, don't want anything with paying taxes for their trades, don't want to contribute in any way, expect free healthcare, YOU can expect them to be in the first day of the month making line to collect the welfare check, they marry in very young age and the women start having babies from teenage years until menopause(NO CONTRACEPTION, the only family planning is to have as many as possible, because for each child they get X on the welfare). They have been here for centuries and their lives have been harder because they DON'T ASSIMILATE, now, due to the socialist benovolence, can get brand new housing and sustenance for steadly increase their numbers.

Mats wrote:
"neither the gypsies nor those black people want to replace the portuguese way of life and impose their own way of life."

MAYBE... NOT CONSCIENCELY!
But ANY place they happen to be majority, has higher criminality, child pregnancy, drug trade, etc, etc... And all the goodies the socialist gave to them AT YOUR EXPENSES have not changed this?

Mats wrote
"I have no problem with them being whatever race they are, as long as they obey the euroipean laws, and as long as we obey the european costumes."

I used to think this way, but reality teaches us that is impossible to receive large numbers of people of different racil background without inevitably race being politized at some point. At this point of cultural marxism expansion it's irracionally dangerous to even believe in such wonderland. Just look at the USA, the freed slaves who live there for centuries and retain almost no memory of the motherland have invented this thing called african-american culture, nation inside a nation. At look aswell to the "LA RAZA" movement of hispanics. Do you really think incoming numberless mexicans will overcome the historic resentment toward amricans and assimilate? They want a piece of the country for their own!!! You live in illusions, countries with fenomenal welfare support like Sweden, France, Germany, UK failed and assimilating foreign cultures mass imigration. You think Portugal will magically manage to do what they with all the resources could not? You live in an illusion...

So what if there are some who love to be portuguese? Does that change to nature of the problem? They being here in larger numbers as time goes by and everything being worse in their midst and around them?

So what if we are still not France? Will we start to care when we get there?

I agree with you whe you say brazillians and eastern europeans fit better, and if there was an actually effective imigration control we would be getting ONLY those kind of imigrants IF we think we need imigration so badly. But we are taking anyone who wants to get in!

Are rulers are in the best of scenarios SLOPPY NEGLIGENT bastards, if they did things rigth , all cultures and races could hang along, because they would all have a country with a respective nation and some could even live here to some numbers. It's this belief in sooo colourfull societies+ guilty ideologies+ some cups of insanity that will blow everything apart.

no2liberals said...

Afonso,

"No2liberals, I have to say, your system is better than ours. Weapons do free the people from tirany if carried by good citizens."

As well as protecting citizens and society at large, against anarchy.
Your nation has existed for over six hundred years, ours for two hundred thirty two. We developed from different models, with both heavily influenced by European examples. Our nation was built by immigrants, and the founders incorporated laws based on the worst examples of the European experience. There has been only one walled city in the entire North American continent since the New World was discovered, and it was in Toronto. Our citizens have always been expected to protect themselves and their country, not run to the walled city as unarmed peasants, and have the King's men protect us. As a nation, we never had a King or Lords...ever! It is a completely different mind set that most Europeans could never grasp, unless there were a major, and perhaps total, upheaval of the way government operates in Europe.
Some words from some of our founding fathers, and the principles established that most of us still believe in.

‘‘Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined’’
— Patrick Henry

‘‘The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.’’
— Patrick Henry

‘‘Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.’’
— Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764

‘‘To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them...’’
— Richard Henry Lee, 1787

‘‘[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.’’
— James Madison, Federalist, No. 46.

‘‘Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? ... If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?’’
— Patrick Henry


How you and your citizens can petition for and gain the rights you deserve, is the challenge you face. We earned our system through a long and painful revolution, that we hope to never have to fight again, which is why so many of us jealously guard our God given rights today. We know, and are reminded almost daily, the heavy price so many good people have paid so we can live in peace.
We do have crime in this country, and sadly realize that we always will, but we can fight back, and not be punished for doing so.
The Armed Citizen.

I would add one thing, that I think is important. In my neighborhood, and indeed in every neighborhood I travel through, in this large metropolitan area, every church, regardless of denomination, has their parking lots full every day there is a service, including week day nights. In a Catholic Church, a few blocks from me, I see people of all ages and races going to and fro. On Fridays, I see many Jewish people walking to the numerous synagogues in this area. Religion has an important role in American society, as it once did in Europe, and I believe secularist societies are a breeding ground for the expansion of Islam, and the Godless.

Mats said...

José,
Pretty much everything you said was right, so I don't have a problem with that. I just want to make some minor points, bkz I think that you and Afonso did not understand my point.

I am not defending mass immigration. We both agree that mass immigration of people who do not want ot assimilate is a problem.
We both agree that Europe needs to close down its borders now. One year from now will be too late. Why do I say this? Because we already have problems as it is.

Let me coment on a few things you said:

Mats wrote:
"Gsypsies, as I said already, have been in Portugal for centuries."

Indeed they have, and altough some have assimilated you can easely see that some other still live in shacks, keep themselves away from society, don't want anything with paying taxes for their trades, don't want to contribute in any way, expect free healthcare, YOU can expect them to be in the first day of the month making line to collect the welfare check, they marry in very young age and the women start having babies from teenage years until menopause(NO CONTRACEPTION, the only family planning is to have as many as possible, because for each child they get X on the welfare). They have been here for centuries and their lives have been harder because they DON'T ASSIMILATE, now, due to the socialist benovolence, can get brand new housing and sustenance for steadly increase their numbers.


That's probably right. So what is your sugestion? Ship the gsypsies "back home"? Where to?


Mats wrote:
"neither the gypsies nor those black people want to replace the portuguese way of life and impose their own way of life."

MAYBE... NOT CONSCIENCELY!
But ANY place they happen to be majority, has higher criminality, child pregnancy, drug trade, etc, etc... And all the goodies the socialist gave to them AT YOUR EXPENSES have not changed this?

Once again, you are right. What do you sugest we do with the gsypsies? I am not saying we do nothing. I am asking what is your sugestion, apart from what I already said?
With the black people who came in recently, and don't want to assimilate, it's easy: send them back home. Don't want to obey the law of the land, then return to sender.


Mats wrote
"I have no problem with them being whatever race they are, as long as they obey the euroipean laws, and as long as we obey the european costumes."

I used to think this way, but reality teaches us that is impossible to receive large numbers of people of different racil background without inevitably race being politized at some point.


You are saying what is possible and what is not possible. I am saying what would be the ideial situation. Since we can't have that (everyone from other countries who come here obey the law of the land, and respect the local costumes), then we should legally do everything to select those who can and who can't come in.
Perhaps the first thing to do is to kick awayh the eurabian government, and install a governement who:

1. Actually stands for defending the local culture, and kicks away the multiculturalism nonsense

2. Respects all ethnic groups, reminding everyone that racism is wrong.


At this point of cultural marxism expansion it's irracionally dangerous to even believe in such wonderland. Just look at the USA, the freed slaves who live there for centuries and retain almost no memory of the motherland have invented this thing called african-american culture, nation inside a nation.


Did you know that black people in the USA are kept in a perpetual state of anger to the stablishment thanks to the democrat nonsense? Democrats need minorities in perpetual state of anger so that they can collect votes.
So even though black people are the primary responsible for that, the silly democrats keep them in such a state for political reasons. It's like the Palestinians. The islamic nations keep them in perpetual poverty as a way to attack Israel.

At look aswell to the "LA RAZA" movement of hispanics. Do you really think incoming numberless mexicans will overcome the historic resentment toward amricans and assimilate?

Oh no, I don't believe that. But then again I never said I did. Mass influx of people who don't want to assimilate is idiocy. This is why I prefer immigrants from nations like China, Hindustan, Ukraine, and Arab Christians. Even if they don't fully assimilate, they will show a great respect for the local nation, and become productive elments of the society rather than lazy muslims, or black supremacists, or lazy mexicans who just want hand outs.


They want a piece of the country for their own!!! You live in illusions, countries with fenomenal welfare support like Sweden, France, Germany, UK failed and assimilating foreign cultures mass imigration.


They "failed" because they never did try harder. They need foreign people in order to collect votes. Sweden, France, Germany and the Uk are pretty much ruled by multiculturalists, who think that every culture is the same, and if we bow down low enough, everyone will sing songs together.

Again, you can't compare that with the gsypsy affair mentioned in the video. Gsypsies are not here in Portugal as the result of "mass immigration".


You think Portugal will magically manage to do what they with all the resources could not? You live in an illusion...


If the moonbat rulers of Portugal keep letting people inside who don't want to become producive elements, then it will fail greratly, just like in other nations.
But then again, I never said anything to the contrary.
Remember that the video is talking about gsypsies, not muslim immigrants.


So what if there are some who love to be portuguese? Does that change to nature of the problem? They being here in larger numbers as time goes by and everything being worse in their midst and around them?

There will only be a problem if the portuguese leaders don't enforce the portuguese rule of law upon all nationals. If the portuguese rulers, start to say that each community can be ruled by their own laws, then, yes., there will be a problem.

There can be ONE law for ALL. Those who don't like that can pick up their bags and move out.

So what if we are still not France? Will we start to care when we get there?


No, and I never said otherwise.


I agree with you whe you say brazillians and eastern europeans fit better, and if there was an actually effective imigration control we would be getting ONLY those kind of imigrants IF we think we need imigration so badly. But we are taking anyone who wants to get in!


We shouldn't allow in just anyone, specially people who, based on the evidence, are more based to create problems (Muslims).

But the eurabians are under the oil spell.

Mats said...

no2liberals,

You are 200% right on. The USA's religious nature is one of the reason behind it's sucess, anti-Christian moonbats not-withstanding.

Secondly, the quote which says that law against guns only disarm the innocent is, once again, right.

Today, thanks to uncontroled immigration, "youths" from morocco or lebanon attack european people in subways. The poor europeans people can't even get a gun to defend themselves!

That is why that the anti-jihad (not "anti-terrorrism", but anti-jihad) is stronger in the USA than in europe, no thanks to american moonbats.

But anyway, the religious force in europe was what kept this continent together. Now that the religious force has been swept aside by the eurabians, the muslims will fill the vacuum with their nonsense.

Another thing worth noticing is that non-theists usually have less children than theists. In a continent like europe, that is a tragedy, since the low birth rates must be filled somehow. Saddly our eurabian leanders want to solve the problem with immigration.

They don't realize that by doing that they are attacking the symptom not the desease. The low birth rate is the result of something that happened BEFORE (the loss of faith).

no2liberals said...

mats,
To review what I have offered as a suggestion to my European friends, on several occasions at this blog:
1)Get to church!
2)Make babies!(preferably as a married couple)
3)Take the children to church!
4)Guard your rights jealously!

Christianity has proven itself to be the greatest bulwark against the aggressive expansion of Islam, since Tours.
Fighting for what you believe, is a much more powerful motivator, than fighting against what your enemy believes.

Afonso Henriques said...

Mats,

"What about a Europe filled with Arab Christians?"

Tricky question... First, I have to say that I don't care that much about religion. I see religion in two ways: A metaphisycall espiritual conection with the occult and a cultural expression.
I've already spoken here aabout the case of the Christian Lebanese exodus to Europe. They left no trace, they assimilated completley.
But they are not really Arabs, are they? A Christian Arab would still have cultural ties close to the Semetic desert and I don't want that in Portugal.
Man, have you noticed my nick name? It's Afonso Henriques, I'd quick my Christian Spanish mother to death if she wants to impose their Christian, European, Iberian foreign (though so close) ways upon this people of the Western fourth of the Iberian Peninsula!! What about Christian Arabs!?

"HOWEVER if you say thatyou are against arabs/pakistani/whoever BECAUSE they are arabs and pakistani, NOT because they are muslims, then we differ."

So, I suspect you are in favour of an European Union, with their "Euromperial" ideology?

"This is not multiculturalism, since multiculturalism says that no culture is better than the other. This is nonsense. A culture that condones wife beating and pedophily is clearly worse than the european culture."

And can any culture better than that be "inferior" or "not so actrative" to another culture?
The thing is, only muslims are bad boogeymen or are there other cultures which are not as good as our?

"You can't equate muslims with gypsies, blacks or chinese because being a muslim is not an ethnic group."
Boy, when I say muslim, what I mean is really all the islamic ethnic groups. I believe you have to difrentiate an individual from a group. And not religions from ethnicities. For me culture, ethnicity and religion are hardly despizable and hardly different matters.

"The ideology gave rise to the culture."
Maybe I should just HIGHLIGHT THIS because its here that we differ.
For me, the ethnic singularities produced a unique culture that produced a unique relligion that influenced both, the ethnicity and the culture... Islamism is firstly a cultural expression (from a given ethnicity or a group of them).

"I say that this isn't a goood example for the purpose of this blog."

Well, I am really flattered Baron did thought this relevant for the blog. I support Baron to fight multiculturalism even harder than he fights islam (which is impossible). Also, I am a radicalising element here. I've for many times urged people to be pro-Europe instead of anti-muslim.

I hink Baron did well. I am sure nobody had saw this kinds of weapons in the hands of "ethnics". I am sure that no one had saw a battle like the ones in Beirute in Western Europe. And this to be posed here is just fenomenal. It happened in the quiet little Portugal where there are no ethnic tensions. Just for knowing that this happened in Portugal, the reades can understand that this happens in France and the other countries where we can feel the tension in the air.
This is a "desmistificação" de-mythification.

Concerning Gypsies I have a sympathy towards them because they are in the same situation of the Jews before Hitler. They do not have a state. Though, they were immigrans. They arrived here in the XVI century, during the zenit of our power as a Nation. I don't have a place to deport them, they should live here according to their laws and costumes but should know who the Lords of the land are. Their numbers have to be kept "under control".

Man, I see no difference between a sharia rulled neighburhood in Europe and an African tribal rulled neighbourhood in Europe.
It's the same. One foreign power imposing its ways on a subject people/place also known as COLONISATION pure and simple.
That's pretty much we did in Africa and America and some small Asian regions...

"I wouldn't have no problem at all saying to a portuguese muslim that my culture is superior to his, since this is not racism or "descrimination""

Now listen. Would you do that to an African or an Asian? Unfortnetly, nowadays I am not able to do this to a Japanese/Korean/Chinese...

Listen this story:
This was a friendly conversation I assisted in a cafe in or near Lisbon between a middle age Portuguese man (born in Africa) and a young adult Angolan. The Angolan said "Angola is beautifull, Luanda is very beautifull, Luanda is more beautifull than any place in Europe and now that we are free we can continue with our development". The Portuguese man replied: "So, please tell me, isn't Luanda Portuguese?" the Angolan said it wasn't of course. The Portuguese man continued: "You see that bay, all ws built by the Portuguese around the bay, your National Bank was built by the Portuguese... when the Portuguese came there it was just a piece of jungle, we gave you Civilisation, we gave you a language, we built cities, beautifull cities for you to live, but please, don't say you were the ones to built them..."
The Angolan was uncapable of disagreein." You see, some cultures are indeed superior to others, and I'm not only talking about islam, I'm generalising.

"who in his right mind stays neutral" to all this great rape of Europe? I won't for sure!

"I don't respect religions that condone child molestation. Do you?"

If I happen to be on a muslim land... it's their culture. I can reject it, I can't (at this given point) fight it in their homes and in their souls.

Your account on immigration is interesting. Yes I am against. Luxembourg is not a Nation. I havr msny migrants in my family though. Concerning emigration it was a problem back in the 60s and 70s. But emigration does not put the carachter of Portugal at risk, immigration does.

I believe that Portugal should remain Portuguese and France, French and Britain, Brittish. We can all have a minor immigration, what we can not have is mass immigration from different cultures.
Haven't you noticed why Eastern Europeans and Brazilians fit well yet? I'll leave you a clue... what kind of Brazilians do not fit that well?

Afonso Henriques said...

No2liberals, I'll comment your longer post but I just wanted to say this:

1)Get to church!

While I agree that "Christian morality" is a must have... The oher day I heard a Catholic (In 10 million people here, 2 millions go to the Catholic church weekly, and 8 million and a half consider them selves Catholics and want the Catholic sacraments of baptism / marriege / funeral... ) mass(?) (missa?). 50% of it was praying: Santa Maria, Mãe de Deus, rogai por nós pecadores... "Holly Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners..."; 20% was help the immigrants that are in need, don't be racist, Europe has the duty of help the whole world... and the other 30% was critics on the morality of the people and society.

Conservative Swede said...

Mats,

Welcome to this blog. This is a very good discussion. And it's good to see the presence and activity of Portuguese increasing like this. I don't have the time right now to go into all the ins and outs of this discussion. Even though most of the good arguments have been presented, there is more to say.

Anyway, regarding the gypsies. The way to deal with that situation is to firmly enforce the law. The destructive sides of their life style must be effectively blocked. Then it's up to them if they want to adapt or to leave for a country better adapted to their life style. After all they are nomadic people. I guess they could go to France or something.

I have no problem with them being whatever race they are, as long as they obey the euroipean laws, and as long as we obey the european costumes.

This is a fine ideal, but missed the point of how deep culture and cultural identity goes within people.

Even people who want to adapt become a problem when they come in high numbers and are from cultures very different from ours. When in high numbers the group dynamic changes, and the initial intention is ineffectuated. Whatever the intentions of the parents who first came here, the young ones develop differently; search for their identity within the now large minority, get radicalized, etc.

The scenario of how this would have turned out if it had been kept in small numbers, is no longer open for discussion. Thanks to what the world look like today, thanks to what our politicians have done to our societies.

And I cannot see the difference between Arab Christians and Mexicans (when in high numbers).

The town Södertälje is the place for Arab/Assyrian Christians. Mainly from Syria, and today from Iraq.

See here and here.

This is the result.

You have fine ideals and good insights, but you need to calibrate some more it with reality.

Conservative Swede said...

Södertälje (od Sweden) has been up many times in this blog.

Afonso Henriques said...

"thanks to uncontroled immigration, "youths" from morocco or lebanon attack european people in subways. The poor europeans..."

you see,
you live in Caxias but you wonder about Maroccans and Lebanese... right...

I don't care about their religion or race, I just want them in their backward home lands again!

José, The Fenec. said...

Mats Wrote:
"That's probably right. So what is your sugestion? Ship the gsypsies "back home"? Where to?"

I answered to your "they are here for centuries" to say that even tough they are here for centuries they are not nationals, they do not belong to the portuguese nation, they live inside it, and even take from it, but are as good as any foreigners recently arrived, just in case you think living for centuries in isolation within another culture, and practicing different values, gives them special status. IT DOES NOT.

That said, my solution is to cut welfare from any healthy working age gipsy, give any social support only with the condition that they have put their kids trough school and not use them in labour when they could be studying, do not give more money for each chid they have, give more power and less handicaps to police to crack down into neighbourhoods and CAMPS known for traffic everykind of illegal substances and products. And many other thins, but this just for starters.

Mat wrote:
"With the black people who came in recently, and don't want to assimilate, it's easy: send them back home. Don't want to obey the law of the land, then return to sender."
Amen to that! And not only black people, anyone who comits a crime and who did not born in Portugal and for wich character and upringing this nation has no responsability, HASTA LA VISTA BABY!

Mats Wrote:
"Did you know that black people in the USA are kept in a perpetual state of anger to the stablishment thanks to the democrat nonsense? Democrats need minorities in perpetual state of anger so that they can collect votes.
So even though black people are the primary responsible for that, the silly democrats keep them in such a state for political reasons. It's like the Palestinians. The islamic nations keep them in perpetual poverty as a way to attack Israel."

What about South Africa, South America, and all the wonderfull places where aren't democrats and islamic nations calling the shots? hehehe. So maybe democrats enpower and use this resentment, but there are allot of examples of "angered" communities around the world and only one factor is common, they aren't white. Sorry everyone about the reality check, objectivity is sooo racist.

Mat wrote:
"There will only be a problem if the portuguese leaders don't enforce the portuguese rule of law upon all nationals. If the portuguese rulers, start to say that each community can be ruled by their own laws, then, yes., there will be a problem. "

No, they will not only be a problem if they don't get the law enforced upon them. If they keep passing upon their children and jeep havinng lots of children, they will prevail, simple. That's what muslims do, even if their children go to school, the family influence mantains a un-assimilated foreign hostile culture spreading under democracy beard. When their numbers reach certain point, kiss democracy goodby, you become nothing but a hostess for "diversity".

So i say this, there is no effective way to counter the fact that gipsies and muslims have 5+ child families, unless we control and limit their reproduction wich of course we could only do while we are in clear numeric superiority and wich of course won't happen while we are in numeric superiority because we all think we're still so safe as to think us such ideas as hegemonically repulsive.

I take this moment to declare i absolutely believe that Europe will remain mostly inactive and for the active part, moslty gentle and inneffective until we (or our grand-children) absolutely are in the middle of a balkanized continent. we're fading, and culturally broke. PERIOD

Com amizade, The Fenec.

Afonso Henriques said...

"Anyway, regarding the gypsies, they are nomadic people. I guess they could go to France or something."

Excellent! Problem solved Conservative Swede! :) XD :)

------------------------------

No2liberals,
yes, anarchy. Most people here in Europe think that if you arm te people, even if only the good citizens, you will get anarchy or a totalitarian government. I, for instance, share your views.

And yes, our Nations have very diferent histories and that deeply influences our mindsets.
I like History and analysing this Peninsula's History I came with some nice theories.

You say my Nation is more than six hundred years old. You're damned right, the modern state of Portugal dates from 1143. More or less 850 years... some extreme views see a proto Nation in the Wesrern Iberia since 1000 b.C...

It's getting to lenghty so I'll stop with the contextualisation. Before the Romans, we had here two main Celtic tribes: The Galaecians and the Lusitanians, and both were already "American"...

People who lived in mountain areas, or in planes protected by mountains, farmers and shepards with a spiritual caste. However, there were no Lord, no King, no leader. There was also a warrior caste of young man who would attack other tribes (especially the Lusitanians expanding Southwards); All people loved their private property, no communists were aloud, though the sense of belonging to a comunity was strong (small fortified city, village, mountain) and people shared things frequently. The higher classes (the richesr people) were the priests, the more successfull warriers, the ones who traded with foreigners and one or another farmer with a cupple of better than average years of production.
This people were self-suficient and everybody had its means to defend themselves (arms).
In case of war, every locality elected a leader, in case of a bigger war, all the region elected a "supreme leader".

During the War against the Romans, some say that Viriato the Lusitanian leader, was the leader of all the Lusitanians and Galaecians, that is all Northern four fifths of Portugal plus the Spanish region of Galiza. He was a humble shepard before the Romans popped in.

That's the way to go. The Romans implemented their ways and a completeley different system was implemented...
After the Germans, and during the 800 years old war of Reconquista against the muslims starting in 711, a great divide started. The more "Celtic-influenced" North, maintained a people always ready to fight and armed, with great respect from the private property, with the Germanic Nobility reflecting this. The centre, the zone of war for 300 years without a clear Nobility, continued like their Northern Christian counterparts but they had lost the love for weapons, they were only protected by a Nobel man, worked for him and fought alongside him. However they were still self suficient and praised their private propery.

The South, a plane territory and with a "heavily mediteeranean" climate, with temperatures rising easily over the 40ºC in the summer, had been a muslim governed area for centuries. - You see, our cities diverge greatly in muslim influence. Braga in the North was only 50 years under the muslims, Beja in the south, 500 years - The people in the South were totally overwhelmed by an elite, the Nobility imposed Feudalism, and it created an elite with all the power and very poor people with neither arms or means to validate their rights, or some property. They worked to the Nobel man and he would give only very few to their subjected compatriots.

The result? The North and Centre is very Conservative and religious; to the South of the Tagus river, the people are extremeley "progressive" and do not care about religion that much and we have a middle area where the mountains became planes and the climate becomes too hot, and of course the Lisbon area with prople from everywhere of the coutry which is more or less like a purple American state, in comparison with the Northern "red region" and the "blue region" South of the Tagus. The Algarve is a purple region also, for diferent reasons. Fortuatley, only 10% of the Portuguese live in the Southern half of the country, South of the Tagus, 30% of which, in the Algarve...

My conclusion: The American system with armed citizens, religion, and private property, along with a good sense of comunity (mainly on those redneck white rural areas of the red states) are the natural and positive way of life in our Civilisation. You only lack a bit of History, Aristocracy and have too much multiculturalism and liberalism.
We Europeans, are currently monsters, living in a completely anti-natural system

(Sorry for the lenght, but I had to sumarise what I like in America... which is not so distant from us)

Mats said...

no2liberals,

I couldn't agree more with your words. Christianty was the soul of Europe, and now that we have lost that, we are like souless zombies, ready to be beheaded by Alice

Mats said...

Afonso,

"Mats,
"What about a Europe filled with Arab Christians?"

Tricky question... First, I have to say that I don't care that much about religion.

How can you not care that much about religion if, in the case of islam, it's all about religion? Christians Arabs fit nicely well in australia, usa and everywhere else. Muslim arabs don't. Christians arabs don't send their kids as "martyrs" to die. Muslim arabs do that. What is the diference? Religion. To put it more in context, it's the ideology that is attacking europe, not the ethnicity.
Yes, a mass influx of anyone into soulless europe can create a problem.

"I've already spoken here aabout the case of the Christian Lebanese exodus to Europe. They left no trace, they assimilated completley."

That's right. Then you agree. The problem is the ideology not the ethnicity. There are many non-european groups who would join hands with you in resisting multiculturalism, and attacking any group of people whose ideology attacks the european way of life, culture and religion.

"A Christian Arab would still have cultural ties close to the Semetic desert and I don't want that in Portugal.

So just having "ties" with a non-european culture, even though they obey the laws of the land, they generally are productive elemtns of the society, and don't want to impose their middle Eastern Christian way of life in europe, is enough for you to not want them? You would descrimnate based on...ethnicity only? Not based on ideology?

You know, you keep saying things like that, soon enouhg you'll start having unwanted bed fellows. Trust me on that. My question is: are those bed fellows really unwanted?



"So, I suspect you are in favour of an European Union, with their "Euromperial" ideology?

No at all. I despise the european union for destroying the unity of europe. I despise their sucking up to islamo-fascists. Generally speaking, the european union needs to go, like Fjordman says.


"The thing is, only muslims are bad boogeymen or are there other cultures which are not as good as our?"

There are other cultures that are inferior to the judeo-christian culture. The african culture is inferior, the indu culture, which condones the burning of wives at the death of the husband, is inferior, the indigenous american-indian culture, which had a lot of violence, blood, human sacrifices and all, is inferior to our western culture. HOwever, the culture that the eurabians are allowing in great numbers into europe is muhameddanism. That is the ideology we need to fight.

"Concerning Gypsies I have a sympathy towards them because they are in the same situation of the Jews before Hitler. They do not have a state. Though, they were immigrans. They arrived here in the XVI century, during the zenit of our power as a Nation. I don't have a place to deport them, they should live here according to their laws and costumes but should know who the Lords of the land are. Their numbers have to be kept "under control".

With the exception of the last eugenic-souding sentence, I agree with all of that. The Gypsys need to obey the law of the land, just like everyone else.

"Man, I see no difference between a sharia rulled neighburhood in Europe and an African tribal rulled neighbourhood in Europe.

Apart from the fact that one is rlegiously motivated,and the other may not be.


"I wouldn't have no problem at all saying to a portuguese muslim that my culture is superior to his, since this is not racism or "descrimination""

Now listen. Would you do that to an African or an Asian? Unfortnetly, nowadays I am not able to do this to a Japanese/Korean/Chinese...


Yes, I would, but i would have to be ready to give the reasons for that. I can't just come to an indian, or a black woman or a muslim, or a animist, and start saying things like that.
I have done that to an indian girl once. Ok, she was Christian and she was a friend, but I did tell her that I consider that the judeo-christian culture is superior than other cultures, indian, african, arabic/islamic, whichever.

Your account on immigration is interesting. Yes I am against. Luxembourg is not a Nation. I havr msny migrants in my family though. Concerning emigration it was a problem back in the 60s and 70s. But emigration does not put the carachter of Portugal at risk, immigration does.

So you are ok with portuguese going to other nations, and obeying the laws and costumes for that nation, but you are not ok with people coming in here, and submitting to our laws and our costumes, and not trying to change our way of life?

So basically, you don't like people from other nations, regardless of what they are?


Like I said, you keep up with that mindse,t and you'll find yourself with weird bed fellows. Nevermind the fact that your viewpoint is easily deafetable with the tag "racism".
If you frame your struggle on the ethnic level, you are dead on arrival. Rather, you should frame your war on the defence of human rights, the defence of portuguese/western superior culture, and the law of the land.
I am not saying that you should sya one thing but in heart believe in the other. I am saying that the right thing to do, in my oppinion, is to defend the european culture. Those who want to come, must obey our laws or get back to their lands. Like I said, it doens't matter to me what or who they are. What matters to me is what they believe.
Remember that I agree with you on the mass immigration. Mass immigration can cause problems to the unity of the nation. I am against mass immigration, but mostly against ANY/ type of immigration of people who want to destroy our way of life, regardless of their skin color.

Mats said...

Conservative Swede

"Anyway, regarding the gypsies. The way to deal with that situation is to firmly enforce the law. The destructive sides of their life style must be effectively blocked. Then it's up to them if they want to adapt or to leave for a country better adapted to their life style. After all they are nomadic people. I guess they could go to France or something.

I agree. The point here is to make the law supreme. If people want to live in here, they must obey our costumes, our way of life, and even our religious beliefs.

"Even people who want to adapt become a problem when they come in high numbers and are from cultures very different from ours.

Yes, and that is why mass immigration can be problematic. I am against mass immigration, specialy of people ideologically motivated like muslims.
However, mass immigration of people from any culture at the same tiome can be a problem. It doesn't mean that it will be a problem. It means that it can be a problem.

And I cannot see the difference between Arab Christians and Mexicans (when in high numbers).

The town Södertälje is the place for Arab/Assyrian Christians. Mainly from Syria, and today from Iraq.


I didn't see anything in the links you said that conected the violence with the Christian comunity therein. Yes, Christians probably go and live there, but it doesn't mean that they are the only arabs who go there.
It seems to me that the ones causing problems in there were muslims, not arab Christians.

Afonso Henriques said...

Matts,

I have already told you that religion is a cultural expression. So, to be part of a religeous group is to be part of something bigger: a culture. I don't care in what you believe, all I care is if your culture is compatible with mine and we've seen since 711 that islamic culture is not compatible wih European culture. Faith? Their problem! We all know the right belief system is cientology!!

You're becoming a litlle over the top... "So just having "ties" with a non-european culture..."
You ask this, after I said what I did about Christian Lebanese... I don't think the majority of the Christian Lebanese are Arabs. Conservative Swede gave you a good example with Christian Arabs (I guess). An Arab who converts to Christianity will retain many muslim/Arabic cultural ties. It probabily will make their culture incompatible with mine. A Christian Lebanese, on the other side... is it so difficult to get? Is it illogically? I don't think so, mate.

I think that you wanted to say "bad" fellows instead of "bed fellows". Well, I don't want to have bed fellows at all... concerning the bad fellows, I am not guilty by association. In fact, today I met a black bad boy from the shooting in Loures... as I said, I'm not guilty by association...

"I despise the european union for destroying the unity of europe."
Good to know that, Mats.

We need to fight "mohamedism", but mainly multiculturalism... just a question: Do you think that the peoples of Europe have a vallue in ethnic grounds per se and should be preserved? Or do you think like our Revolutionary Hero, the man who even putted this third world counry in the European Union, Mário Soares, who stated: "Well, if the Portuguese happen to become a minority in Portugal, we may start having some problems"? and by the way, another: "What do you think about the process of Naturalisation?

"Apart from the fact that one (sharia rulled neighbourhood in Europe) is rlegiously motivated,and the other may not be."

I agree. But I see this as a proof of the superiority of the muslim culture: They sacralise their culture; their ways of life are so deep in them that have an heavenly dimension...
For us, in the other side, that looks like hell. However, he just shows the strnght and power of the muslim ethos...
We, as a Civilisation, kind of have lost this superior dimension. A quote from Évola:

"When the (earthly) path (to the divine) is lost, honour remains; when honour is lost, ethics remains; when ethics is lost, morality remains; when morality is lost, moralism remains. Moralism is the cynical action of demanding from one what he, by weakness of their soul and honour can not attend. And thus is complete the path of evolution and profanity of the Human way of life and the European Civilisation."

I have to confess that when an "ethnc" really pisses me off, he will hear some racial insults... blacks usually retribute it and are ok with that, but try do that to a muslim and you'll see the world fall apart. That's the only two ethnicities I've done that. And Brazilians too...
But listen to me: the ones who need to hear thar the European Civilisation is superior (against, regarding Chinese/Korean/Japanese and many spects even Jews, you'll have a hard time proving your superiority) are not the ethnic minorities. They know that. You have to tell that to other Europeans, and you will be shocked with the numbers of Europeans who find this offensive, espcially urban European females.

I think that French people should be entiltled to France. But, if the Portuguese go there and France accepts them, what the hell do I have to do with it? I recognise that the Portuguese who go to France are not French. I have a cousin born in France (Portuguese father, French mother) who says the French are racists and the Arabs in France are victims of descrimination like the Portuguese and the Spaniards or Italians... I have another three, who say that the Arabs should all go to the desert...
Lunacy does not chose ethnicity. Some ethic groups just have the genes to make things big more than others: Big Civilisations, Big Stupidity; A Great Mass Murder of Jews, or Invite everyone to rape our women, beat our children and steal our lands...

"you don't like people from other nations, regardless of what they are?"

If I were not to like people of other Nations, what would I be doing in such a multicultural place like Gates of Vienna?
The question is not disliking people, is to assure that we are not overwhelmed nor suffer "modifications" like we have. Or don't you think the world has gone mad since 1939?

"Nevermind the fact that your viewpoint is easily deafetable with the tag "racism"."
Can you please say to me what a racist is so that I can find out if I fit in that defenition (or my ideas)?

Only if you are to demonise me with such vague words as "racist!!!", "nazi!!!" or "fascist!!!" I can give you some amount of "rightlyhood".

"you should frame your war on the defence of human rights,"

I will defy you to do one thing.
Frequent this three blogs daily:
www.gatesofvienna.blogspot.com
www.brusselsjournal.com
www.acidadedosossego.blogspot.com

Visit them daily and read at least half of the posts and their comments... comment as you will. At first you may not agree with much, but ask questions and don't give up. You'll change radically.
Do it, man! Really, just don't let that affect your personal life, go easy but without fear. After that month, you'll thank me.

"the defence of portuguese/western superior culture"

I have to tell you that some times I think that culture has already vanished taking in consideration the strenght of the European Union and the ones who govern the West.

Diamed said...

Mats: This argument is painful to watch because everyone is stepping lightly around the real problem.

Racial differences in IQ.

Gypsies, Blacks, arabs, Mexicans, Indians, australian aborigines, american-indians, pacific islanders, guess what they all share?

Lower average IQ than whites.

These people will never assimilate because they cannot assimilate into a culture and society designed for high IQ whites. Our country is not suitable for them, or them for us. We are completely different as groups and we will never get along.

Low IQ people will always be poor, unemployed, criminal, overbreeding, their votes will always be socialist and predatory, their culture vulgar and unwanted, their company painful. We much prefer the company of intelligent people who have 'class', 'manners,' 'speak in complete sentences,' 'are educated,' 'well groomed,' etc. Being surrounded by loud, ugly, rambunctious, violent, substance abusing, pet neglecting, littering, lawn-not-mowed, house-not-painted, dumb people is an awful standard of living. Whites want to preserve an environment, friends and neighbors and lovers, a way of life that they can find only among other whites. Condemning them to live in a third world squalor of third world peoples, no matter what their beliefs, would always result in white flight, leading to another loss of territory, until we are simply genocided off the map. No whites accept living among non-whites, sending their kids to non-white schools, or any other diversity PC crap. They flee to all white areas and rebuild their lives from scratch, living the natural white way among other whites who naturally fit in.

Since it's obvious we don't want these people by our internal migration behavior, why shouldn't we restrict immigration? Why should we be constantly ceding territory to non-whites and shrinking our populations by hundreds of millions so that the non-white population can balloon by another couple billion at our expense?

Why accept immigrants who fit in? Wouldn't white children born into the language, culture, religion, looks, habits, intelligence and personality fit MUCH better? What do you have against white kids? Why do you want to take land reserved for white children, and hand it over to non-whites who 'might possibly fit in somewhat well.' Will you tell me they'll fit in better than our own blood? Our own fair haired, bright eyed babies? Do they not deserve a place on earth? Will you reject them and instead prefer a 'christian arab?' If you honestly prefer christian arabs to your own people, your own children, your own kin, your own tribe, then you're sick and on the road to extinction.

There is only so much room on earth, only so many people can live, every passport or visa you hand to your model african or arab is one less child or grandchild our European people can have. And given their insane birth ratio to ours, giving just one passport to your model african, means the birth of hundreds of africans in the near future, and the corresponding choking out of hundreds of white babies who could've been born, but now can no longer be supported. It's us or them. Survival of the fittest. Evolution in action. Those who will not defend their genetic relations will die out, those that do will multiply, spread, and prosper. I for one do not think the best people who have ever lived, the Europeans, should be the ones who go extinct. I do not think africans should triple in population and spread all over the globe, when we already know what they've done to africa. I do not think arabs should get Europe when we already know what they've done to the middle east. I do not think amerindians should own north america when we already know how they lived before we got here. I think my people should fight for every inch of our soil and everyone else who wants it be damned. From Russia to Australia to America to Europe to the tip of South Africa to Argentina to Uruguay to New Zealand, I want to see whites having white children who have white grandchildren in PERPETUITY and I never want to lose a single one of us.

(Sorry for the length and the blatant racism Baron, but I think a lot of us wanted to make this argument but were too afraid to do so.)

And afonso, I love you man, you have it all right. We are fighting FOR our people not AGAINST anyone, this is the only ideal that can get anywhere. No one will ever enthusiastically embrace a negative. You aren't alone in your opinions.

Conservative Swede said...

Diamed,

I think a lot of us wanted to make this argument but were too afraid to do so.

It's funny that you should say so, and I'm sure this is also the reason that you stick to an argument that you should be to intelligent to do.

Counter argument: The Chinese have higher IQ than we do, but still they do not assimilate, but with few exceptions stay within their group (in fact they never ever really leave China).

Surely, IQ correlates with many things we speak of. But that's also the only think it's useful for. Correlations in social studies.

The answer is instead found in the ethnicity, mainly in the culture.

no2liberals said...

Afonso,
I was thinking in terms of the revolt against the Castillians in the 14th century, as the point when Portugal established it's independence. Thanks for the background info.

I have been gone for most of the day, after going to church, then visiting with friends. On my way home, I stopped at a store to put gas in my buggy, and prepare for another busy week. The convenience store is across the street from the Catholic church I mentioned earlier, and at 5p.m., the parking lot was full on both sides of the church, and people were parking on the two busy streets that it faces. I saw an elderly woman with a walker slowly moving for the door, and people of all ages heading for the same door. I saw caucasians, hispanics, orientals, and perhaps other nationalities in this same crowd. All peacebly, and purposefully going to the same church, and perhaps for different reasons, as the youngest couldn't possibly have the same concerns as the elderly. What brings them together, this divergent group of people? Is it the word of God? Is it salvation or redemption they are seeking? Is it the sense of community, and communing with other loving and peaceful people with a shared ideology? There are many different reasons so many find their church, and their respective religions important. Not everyone will share all of the tenets of the church, but that doesn't mean they don't share many other things which the church provides.
I am not proselytizing to you or anyone, I know where I am and where my center is. I would ask you to consider just doing one thing, at some point in your busy schedule, if you have the opportunity, stop and visit with a priest and raise some questions you have about your beliefs.
I wrote a piece a while back at my friend's blog about my personal journey, my God moment, if you will. If I had not been open to the message, at that time, it easily could have passed me by.
We all find our own path, in our own way, in our own time.
I'm proud to say that my daughters have felt the call, and are now attending church each Sunday with my grandchildren. Giving the foundation for their belief system, that I hope will continue on to their children and grandchildren.

Jacobgandersen said...

It is not quite true that the Europeans doesnt have firearms. A lot of people do have them, we just dont run around in the streets and use them in public. Also, a lot of countries in Europe has army national guards, where the guardsmen are alloved to have their firearms at home. Again we have a lot of hunters and sportshooters who also have the right to have weapons at home. I heard somewhere that countries like Sweden and Finland, andmaybe Norway too? - have a very liberal law when it comes to firearms. Finland should be among the top 3 countries when it comes to having firearms in private homes. So again, a lot of people here have them, but of course, we could always need more for when the day comes...

Diamed said...

@Swede:

'Counter argument: The Chinese have higher IQ than we do, but still they do not assimilate, but with few exceptions stay within their group (in fact they never ever really leave China).'

I don't think that disproves what I said, only expands it to address further issues I didn't go into.

Baron Bodissey said...

Diamed --

Blatant racism is not ruled off the turf here.

I don’t share it, and I don’t agree with you, but you have stayed within the bounds of civility and temperateness in making your case, which is what I ask for.

Personally, I’m with Conservative Swede — the issue is culture, or ethnicity if you will. The bloodline or DNA plays only a marginal part.

I’m not denying the possible existence of genetic factors in such things, but there is no control group that allows us to prove the case. No genetically distinct group exists without an accompanying culture, and it cannot be demonstrated that the genes cause the cultural differences. The twin studies have not been extensive enough to prove anything, and many other factors are in play.

So the question is an open one, as I have often said before. It is also forbidden to discuss it in polite company.

But not here, because we’re not polite.

I know that by even allowing this discussion, or by declaring that the question is still open, I make myself into a “racist”. That’s the way the issue is framed today in the West. The “science is closed” on race, just as it is on global warming. If you’re willing to discuss it, or to keep an open mind, then you are as bad as the worst died-in-the-wool Ku Klux Klan Nazi white supremacist Aryan nationalist bigot.

So be it.

Afonso Henriques said...

No2liberals,

XIV century revolt against the bloody Spaniards? No sr! We had some dinastic problems and the bloody King had a younger daughter who was married with the Castillan King. When the heir to the Portuguese King died the Castillan "Conquistador" replied he was the legitimate King of all Spain (The Peninsula).
Fortunetley, our King had had bastards and one of then made it to King. Also, we had this Lord, D. (That is Don, our way of saying Lord) Nun' Álvares Pereira , a true Duke of Wellington of the XIV century which has been considered a Saint for more than 500 years despite the refusal of the Popes to accept him as a Saint (it seems that this one will canonise him though, after 600 years of his death).

But if you are refering to the 1580-1640 period in which we were under Spanish power that's another thing... we even have a place of Restauration and a fashion neighbourhood in Lisbon called The Restaurators to comemorate the Restauration of the Independence.
Again, dynastic problems... every time those guys from the East came for us, we kicked their asses...
In this case, our eighteen years old King, raised by Christian monks, D. Sebastião, decided that it would be better to invade and colonise all Morocco and to make a war against Islam (where have I heard this?) in islamic territory than to find out some royal (()) in which he could make a royal prince for the people. (You being religeous I think you'll like the link at D. Sebastião. If so, you can find more, look for The Fifth Empire as well)

The result? Well, the muslims killed him in Northern Morocco, in Alcácer Quibir. What happened is in the link. However, in his book "I am a Portuguese... what can I do now?", the Beret cames up with a whole new theory to what happened to the young King, which includes the libido of muslim soldiers and their predilection for blonde hair, blue eyes and a 18 years old hairless bottom that turns red at the third hit...
The result to the Nation? Well, we had to fight a sixty years long war with Spain, we had to offer all India to the English, we lost South Africa and Indonesia to the Dutch, we lost all our navy fighting our ally, England, in that account of the Invincible Spanish Armada and we were at war with the XVI century Dutch for twenty years in order to get Northern Brazil back in Portuguese hands. It could have been worst... Yo poderia estar hablando español como en Los Angeles...

Afonso Henriques said...

No2liberals,

Sorry, the introduction got too lenghty. I mean, you are right. We all have to find our "path to the divine" by ourselves. Our religeous practices and our faith... all by ourselves. In my National Anthem there is a passage:
"Os meus igréjos avós" meaning "my church going grandparents", implying that the more you get mature, the older you get, the more prone you get to believe in God and be more religeous. It's however important to transmit OUR cultural mensage trough religeon to the younger generations. Everybody his religeous in his way and the older we get, the closer we become to God.
I don't want to talk about me but I can talk about my mother... she was raised in a culturally Catholic ambient/society though she was not baptized. All the other kids were baptized and when she was around ten years old, she wanted to be baptized as a Catholic (this shows some faith uh?) but - and this today would be in the news - she was deemed "unpure" by the priests because she was not baptized as a baby and was daughter to a woman who had abandoned the religion to become.... a... Protestant! My grandmother being baptized at birth a Catholic but returning herself to her mother's religion from which she (my grandmother's mother) had converted to Catholicism.
My mother left all churches and today considers her self to be a... Christian. She is religeous, she reads some bible passages (almost?) every night before going to bed, she wears a gold collar at her neck with a gold cross, though she has already been assaulted twice (they robbed the necklace) but the crucefix still always miraculous fall into the floor and returnes to her (one time, two days after). When confrontated weather she's Catholic or Protestant she does not to know what to answer... she says that the saints shall not be worship, that that is a "Pagan" practice but considers that Virgin Mary has a especil place in her... She visits sometimes the Catholic santuary of Fátima but she feels Catholicism to autoritarian and opressive, she also says that Protestantism is more concerned with freedom and justice...

Religion is important no doubt. Culture is more, however and, while we can chose our set of believes, we may stick between some cultural limits (I would not talk to my mother if she says islam is good, for instance).

One thing transcend both culture and religion however: The Divine, the Transcendent which has its own manifestations in Religion in culture.

Have nice day you all!

Conservative Swede said...

Baron wrote:
Personally, I’m with Conservative Swede — the issue is culture, or ethnicity if you will. The bloodline or DNA plays only a marginal part.

Oh, I wouldn't downsize the importance of bloodline/DNA that much. Surely culture is the dominant part of ethnicity (in general). But ethnicity is a hodgepodge of all those things.

It was specifically IQ I objected to here. It's a blunt weapon. Just gives correlations. Just like for example current geographical position. I think it surely correlates as well as IQ with the issues we are after. But it would also say that Mullah Krekar is all fine since he's just now in Norway.

I'm fine if people speak about IQ in a scientifically correct way. But when it's elevated to some sort of metaphysical concept, then I have to protest.

Afonso Henriques said...

Diamed, I was not to comment your "essay" but that "I love you" part... you can flatter the commenters in that way!

I really was to "avoid polemics" but I have to say that you say many truths. You say some things a bit to extreme... I agree with Conservative Swede, IQ is not a prime time factor, it is a factor however.

"Why accept immigrants who fit in? Wouldn't white children born into the language, culture, religion, looks, habits, intelligence and personality fit MUCH better? What do you have against white kids? Why do you want to take land reserved for white children, and hand it over to non-whites who 'might possibly fit in somewhat well.' Will you tell me they'll fit in better than our own blood? Our own fair haired, bright eyed babies? Do they not deserve a place on earth? Will you reject them and instead prefer a 'christian arab?' If you honestly prefer christian arabs to your own people, your own children, your own kin, your own tribe, then you're sick and on the road to extinction."

This is simply the truth! And I am scared by just thinking in this terms, but is pure logic... I am sorry, I am too rational/emotive to close my eyes over this subject... It's all truth! Well, the only possible objection to that is, once it is directed at Portugal, the light eyed babies, if there is some 35% of them, it's too much, blonds? Half of it! But who cares! I am really afraid now, because this seems to be simple truth, like 1+1=2

"There is only so much room on earth, only so many people can live, every passport or visa you hand to your model african or arab is one less child or grandchild our European people can have. And given their insane birth ratio to ours, giving just one passport to your model african, means the birth of hundreds of africans in the near future, and the corresponding choking out of hundreds of white babies who could've been born, but now can no longer be supported. It's us or them. Survival of the fittest. Evolution in action. Those who will not defend their genetic relations will die out"

Idem, and your not even considering miscegenation, on white violence, or any catastrophic event. That is scaring, man.

"I for one do not think the best people who have ever lived, the Europeans, should be the ones who go extinct."

Indeed, the same feeling in this side of the screen. I am already thinking how bad it is for us to loose the Tibetans for ever, what about the Europeans? One million and a half that!

Then you go talking about European-countries and you include South Africa, uh! Forget it, they are already all dead. I believe there are more whites in Mexico both in number and percentage, and Mexican culture is much more European than that of South Africa!

no2liberals said...

Afonso,
Thanks for the info on the history of Portugal.
I mentioned earlier the short history of the U.S., and how it came to be as the result of a long and horrific revolutionary war. The following is a speech that was given, that tells the story of the signers of our Declaration of Independence, the less famous one's, and what the cost of signing that document was.
Our Lives, Our Fortunes, Our Sacred Honor!

One_of_the_last_few_Patriots_left said...

The responses to this article have wandered around a bit, but it has certainly made for interesting reading! Thank you Afonso Henriques, for filing this report with GoV ( and thank you, Baron, for posting it. )
Also, thank you, Afonso, for your comments on the history of Portugal.

Let me note a couple of things:
Afonso wrote: "Some revolvers may be legal, as well as some rifles.......
By the way, only low caliber revolvers are legal. Any kind of shotgun and automatic weapons is illegal here. However, many Portuguese men (some 5%) have G3's"

Several questions present themselves:
Just exactly what kind of guns are legal for civilians? And what kind of liscences/permits or other beaurocratic paperwork has to be filled out by good people (while criminals laugh?)
"...many Portuguese men...have G3's." You mean, after the revolution, they didn't give them up?! Tsk, tsk... ;)
Tell us more, if you can, Afonso.
Also, it has been several days since the original post; has any more information come out about this incident (especially concerning where these people got their weapons?)


Jacobgandersen wrote: "It is not quite true that the Europeans don't have firearms.......guardsmen are allowed to have their firearms at home.......Sweden and Finland, and maybe Norway, too?.......Finland should be among the top 3 countries when it comes to having firearms in private homes."

Indeed, a couple years ago, I read a very interesting article which said that not only are "hunting rifles" allowed in Finland, but also, with a good deal of extra paperwork, fully automatic weapons. Indeed, the author wrote that on a per capita basis, Finland has more privately owned full-auto weapons than the USA. (Hmmmmm....... do you maybe think...the Finns remember the Winter War? Or for that matter, the Cudgel War??)
Perhaps our Danish readers, or the illimitable Fjordman, could tell us more?

Afonso Henriques said...

Thankyou for that link No2loberals.

Last Patriot,

I can tell you some things. I'll rely mainly on wikipedia for links. I no its acuracy is far from perfect, but I think many of their articles are good, at least for starters to have an idea of what we're talking about.

I'll try to be brief and not develop on things you can not understand due to lack of contextualisation.

First, the G3 (Jê trêsh in Portuguese) is this babe babe.
To hold one will make you quiet powerfull in a Europe with no weapons of war. The G3 is in use in the Portuguese army since 1963 and is still the major weapon of the Portuguese soldier, since the mid eighties along with the Israeli Galil...

You can now understand that the G3 was the weapon with each the Portuguese fought the Colonial War in three fronts from 1961 to 1974, a loyal weapon I must say. If you take in account our diminute size, our no existant allies (sorry England, you could have done more!!!), and that the Africans were supported by all indepent Third World Nations, the Communists and since mr. Kennedy, even the U.S.A.... it was quiet a militar achievment. And despite the war did not came into our territory, it was our major war in the XX century, the second being the First World War.

I'll talk about the dynamics of Portugal in the 60s and early 70s:
To simplify, you have to know that there are four main intervenients: António de Oliveira Salazar, the fascist dictator and the other fascist followers, the political elite; The communists who were the only political oposition of the regime with balls. Though, illegalised like the other parties, the Communists underwent into illegality, boycoting the government and gaining suporters, they tried to overthrown the government but did never made a coup per se, they had great support on Alentejo, their leader was Álvaro Cunhal and any Communist who was caught would have an hard time at the hands of the PIDE, the political police. They always kept fighting however; Then we had the military, an elite, at first, they were all fascist, some more other less, today, they would be considered far-right. But with the time they got and more liberal and in the mid 70s we had some leftist high ranking militars and one or another even communist. A group of young capitains made the Carnations Revolution, one of them was Salgueiro Maia but we'll get there later; And then we have the burguoise today's elite, mainly former Communists. I'll give you three examples:
The current president of the European Comission, José Manuel Durão Brroso;
The current mayor of Lisbon... how can I describe him? He's son to an (East) Indian women, and a communist Portuguese, one of his grandfathers was involved in the murderer of our King, D. Carlos.
And of course, Mário Soares, the man who instaured the current Portuguese State, who placed us in the European Union and who's in favour of immigration. Nawadays, in his 80s, he passes his time with Chavez, Fidel, and one or another "freedom fighter" but back then, they were "political refugees" in the best Hotels of France and Algeria... they are also known as *Socialists*. They came here and got power at the coast of the work of the Communists. It is reported that when in Paris, Mario Soares burnt a Portuguese flag in the front of poor Portuguese Immigrants in order to show "his revolt against the fascists".

After understanding this four major groups of influence, one of which (the *Socialists*) were in foreign lands and only came to Portugal after the Revolution, you can now understand the
Carnation Revolution. But before it I want to jump into 2006 Portugal, to the television show "The Great Portuguese" in which the people could vote in their favourite hero. Of course, that does not represent the people but is a good indicator. Here are the results:
1st Salazar, the fascist dictator from 1932 untill 1968. Oreviously, he have saved Portugal from bankrupcy with the job of finance minister. He had 41% of the votes.
2nd Álvaro Cunhal, the Communist leader who fought against the fascist all his life. He came from a high class family and was a gentlemn for all his life. He was a painter and a writer as well. He han 19% of the votes
4th D. Afonso Henriques, our first King, the man who conquered more land to Christian hands during all the Reconquista, he got 12,5% of the votes.
5th Luís Vaz de Camões, our better poet, from the XVI century. He wrote the epic classical poem "Os Luíadas", our Portuguese Eneida.
9th Marquis of Pombal, the man who rebuilt Lisbon to what it is now after the earthquake that devastated the city in 1755 (New Orleans was nothing comparing to that)
11th Vasco da Gama, the first Eurpean to sail into India, what would aloud Portugal to start to colonise it and becoming the most powerful European country do to the Indian richesses.
12th Salgueiro Maia, the Capitain of the April Revolution.
13th Mário Soares, our first Prime Minister and our first non militar presdent, the Socialist who had a great life in Paris during the dictatorshp burning flags and that placed us in the European Union.

Afonso Henriques said...

Returning to the Carnation Revolution, it is still a really foggy area... some low ranking capitains and few leftist generlas developed a conspiracy. Mostly due to Salgueiro Maia, they were able to get part of the army into Lisbon, where Salgueiro Mais siezed the fascist leader, Marcelo de Caetano, who was able to escape into Brazil. THe situation got very tense with some fascist generals shooting and stuff and with a warshipp ready to blow up with Lisbon in the middle of the Tagus. Due to the efforst of Salgueiro Maia, the Air Force did not take a position. According to the story, there was a fascist general with a small army about the same size the army of the rebelling capitains, the fascist general started shooting but Salgueiro Maia went to him disarmed and convinced the fascist's men to go to his side, almost one by one. There were almost no deaths during the Revolution and the deaths were not the responsability of the rebels.
The Revolution main theme was the"3D", that is to Democratize, De-colonise and Develop Portugal.
The consequences? One million Portuguese (10%) had to come for Portugal and to left the colonies. Angola, was more developed than mainland Portugal but we gave that to the blacks, many of the black soldiers wo fought for us couldn«t make it to Portugal and were killed by the Third Worlders. Then, in Portugal, the PREC happened. The PREC means "Revolutionary Period in Continuation".

The PREC lasted from the revolution in 25th April 1974 utill 25th November 1975 this period is even more foggy.

All I can say is that it was a period in which any man comming from the army had its own G3 and the Communist were the better implemented party. The right wing was desintegrating but still had some power, mainly due to the Conservative, Christian people. During this period six governments were formed without any elections taken. The army got politized and dangerously divided.

In the 25th November 1975, the communist factions of the army (and weren't few) took controle over Lisbon. But the most powerfull lobby then in Portugal, the right wing "Group of the Nine", composed of nine high ranking right wing generals, decided that Portugal COULD NOT fall into Communist hands, and the nine knights took action. They met the Communist forces and were already ready to retreat to Oporto and divide the country and two, then a civil War would follow to reconquer the Communist South. Both America and the Soviet Union were ready to act. (Can you imagine a Communist state in Western Europe in the mid 70s?, well, it almost happened!)

The governor back then called the Communists and the Group of the nine (among the Communists were Rosa Coutinho that ordered the Africans to vicious attack, murder and rape all whites in Africa).
Ah! and many bombings and coup de était happened in this period. In Alentejo, communist camps were created in which the masses assaulted the rich, went to live in their houses and worked in a communist way (there is a wonderful video of this epoch of a Communist theorist trying to explain Communist to one of the people, the man said it was illogical, and he couldn't understand it, he claimed that it was exploration so badly that the theorist, friend of the people start beating the man).
Well, the truth is that in 25th November 1975 the Group of the Nine was able to avoid a civil war, a communist state in Western Europe and his leader, Ramalho Eanes, became our first elected president ever since.
The last nobel man to hold real power in Portugal in my view.

Afonso Henriques said...

Last Patriot, concerning the developments in this black vs gypsy war.

The police is still guarding the neighbourhood. Virtually all the gypsies fled (the blacks made a damned good work at ethnc cleansing) and now they are crying for an all gypsy neighbourhood because the blacks are saying - say the gypsies - that "this neighbourhood is for the niggers".

The few gypsies who're staying are terrified by the possibility of the police leaving the neighbourhood. Gypsies have no future there! It still is a no go area, but also for gypsies!

Today, the police were searching for a blue van filled with weapons of war that was fleding the neighbourhood. The police stopped a blue van with gypsies in order to looking for weapons. Innocent gypsies they were, the gyspie women started to fell bad and the policeman thought she was acting. Result? One gypsy death. The policeman will - I hope - loose his job.

Concerning the question, where the weapons are from? Trafic! Brazil, Morocco or Spain...

The thing here is so bad that recently a Portuguese-Brazilian criminal killed a little girl and raped her mother in Brazil, he came to Portugal and killed two policemen, he escped back to Brazil. Howeve weapons were found in his "things" that could arm a small army... I think I can not find the link. All the links I got is to Brazilian problems. I just can't find the links...

A fast search on the net and I get this numbers:
1 million legal weapons in Portugal, 10% of the population has a gun. Due to the number of people with more than one weapon, I'd say that 5 to 8% have legal weapons (and 10% have illegal weapons).
Half of the weapons are rifle for haunt. Mainy wild pigs and small "bambis". So, only 2 to 4% have non haunting legal weapons;
In 2005 90% of the licenses to have guns were rejected by the authorities. The rifles to haunt animals are more common in the rural areas. I can't find more. But I remember some three years ago a law was creted to restringe even more the aquisition of weapons and the weapons that can be legal.

The law, extensively, in Portuguese: Law

P.S. hearing the news now, a gypsy women claim that after the shooting, the blacks shoot her daughter at the leg and said that:
"Do you want us to put us with the niggers? Only if it is for us to die, to kill or to die..."

There are hundreds of gypsies homeless. I just hope them not to go to the centre of Lisbon...