Friday, September 19, 2008

More Violence Against Pro-Köln Supporters

I’ve reported previously on violence directed at the Pro-Köln (Pro-Cologne) movement, which was organized to oppose the building of a large mosque in the city of Cologne. Pro-Köln has joined forces with Cities Against Islamization to hold an Anti-Islamization Congress in Cologne tomorrow. Around 1,500 anti-jihad activists are expected to attend, but indications are that there will be tens of thousands of “anti-racist” demonstrators present to confront them. The Cologne police are preparing for the possibility of violence.

However, violence has struck again in advance of the event, this time directed against a press conference held on board a ship on the Rhine. Our Flemish correspondent VH has translated today’s report of the incident published on the Pro-Köln website:

Violence against persons and property

While the press conference of the citizens’ movement Pro NRW [North Rhine-Westphalia] in Leverkusen-Wiesdorf passed without disturbance, the press conference [on the Anti-Islamization Conference] held by the citizens’ movement on a ship on the Rhine was massively attacked by Leftist extremists.

During this attack, the self-proclaimed “antifascists” beat up the 45-year-old German-Jewish member of the Federal Executive Board of the citizens’ movement Pro Deutschland, Michael Kucherov, in the district town hall of Rodenkirchen.

Kucherov was completely stunned that he became the target of such massive violence simply because he wanted to join the press conference together with members of the Pro-Köln movement. An anti-Semitic motivation for the attack was not evident, however.

The Rhine vessel on which the press conference took place with nearly thirty journalists from half of Europe was damaged severely by stones thrown by Leftist extremists, and is no longer seaworthy. It must be towed to a port, but is currently in the control of the police so they can catch the Leftists bent on violence who want to chase the ship.
- - - - - - - - -
The managing director of the Pro-Köln Group Council, the Cologne board member Manfred Rouhs, comments on the incident:

“In Leverkusen, where we as a large group of about a hundred members and supporters of the citizens’ movement were protected by the police, there was no violence by the leftist extremists. These people apparently prefer to take on individuals with their large groups. However, it also means that the safest place in Cologne is the Heumarket on Saturday. Because around 1,000 to 1,500 of our supporters will gather there, and the police will show their strength at that location.”

The assault on Michael Kucherov is cowardly and contradicts the claim of the Left to be an “anti-fascist” coalition, ad absurdum. The journalists who witnessed the press conference have today been able to see for themselves from which side the violence originates.

Maybe this experience will give journalists a reason for some deep thought. More extensive reporting might show the potentially violent offenders that the reporters are in no way the executioners of a silent majority, but are able to put themselves and their own private political preferences to one side.

VH adds his somewhat abridged translation of this article from the Cologne website:

Although the location of the press conference was kept quiet, leftists did find out about it. When the invited guests boarded the ship, stones, bricks and paint-bombs where thrown at them and the panoramic windows of the Moby Dick were shattered. The Captain of the Rhine vessel Moby Dick decided to disembark immediately because of the attacks by the leftist extremists. Therefore some journalists could not board in time.

The ship was escorted by two police boats to a location where the guests could disembark safely and the planned trip to the site of the planned Grand Mosque [Ehrenfeld] had to be abandoned. Some protesters were arrested.

A few hundred protesters had gathered on the site of the Mosque to await the ship. Amongst them was the SDP [Social Democrat] District Mayor of Ehrenfeld, Josef Wirges, who spoke to them with a megaphone: “Ehrenfeld is colorful instead of brown. We cannot use anyone here to instigate hate and discrimination.”

The CDU [Christian Democratic Union] Mayor of Cologne Fritz Schramma said: “Such a Congress […] we don’t want and that is what we as a large majority of the citizens of Cologne stand for.”

Despite the violent incidents [video] Pro Köln will proceed with the large rally on Saturday in the old city center of Cologne as planned. “We will not step aside because of violence,” a spokesman said. The Cologne police have already prepared several thousand officers. They expect tens of thousands [some expect at least 40,000] counter-demonstrators [from all over Europe].

30 comments:

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

Gee, which side do you think our erstwhile friends will take¿

I doubt I'd be so brave as these people. Though, I suppose, they probably thought the same thing until they were faced with this and realised they had no choice but to stand firm.

Bela said...

I stated several occasion that the Islamisation of the EU is a fait accompli because it's supported - either actively or passively - by the majority of the EU populace.

We can growl as much as we want on sympathetic blogs, and those who are bestowed with fantastic imagination can dream about the "White Skinned" Russians who will liberate the White race! by invading Paris, either by foot or on tanks, may be they will parachute from the sky into Londonistan and cut the pesky imams' heads off.

Of course to save the "White Race" ...so blabbering the idiots.

And the Mediterranean initiative of Sarko is in the works too so the Russian liberators (the White Skinned only) will face off their Muslim friends they armed with nukes to kill the nasty Jews.

We'd better be serious and discuss the most likely scenarios that will follow the eventual collapse of Europe.
Cut the crap about the Russian liberation of Paris or Rome, or please explain how is going to happen on the ground.
Putin will send his army and invade whole Europe to save the White Race? Really?
How old are you? Are you on drug?

Baron Bodissey said...

Bela, why are you arguing in such an unpleasant tone about this here? There's nothing about Russia in this post. Kindly stay on-topic.

Fjordman said...

Bela: How come you automatically identify violent Leftist extremists with the populace at large? If that wasn't the case in Eastern Europe, why should it be in Western Europe? Why the double standard? Frankly, it annoys me.

The most interesting thing about this is how closely related the "anti-racists" are to the violent totalitarian movements of past generations, both in thinking and in methods. Multiculturalism truly is a replacement Communism.

Conservative Swede said...

I think for Bela it is on-topic, because his hatred for Western Europe and his hatred for Russia are emotionally connected. The unpleasant tone is a reflection of the inside of his soul. As he has declared, he will enjoy the destruction of Europe while eating popcorn.

Conservative Swede said...

Fjordman,

Good luck with trying to reason with Bela. Last time around you treated him as some sort of oracle about the inner nature of Marxism. You picked those quotes of his in the middle of his harangues where he declared how he would enjoy the destruction of Europe while eating popcorn. That was truly repulsive.

I will have to say something about the character of Scandinavians. They can often be very slow to "get it". Their (subconscious) strategy is to pretend normality is prevailing, and continue politely.

Fjordman, I think you have missed the fact that Bela is having a spectacular meltdown. Read his comment again. It's the comment of a person who is so bent out of shape that he has lost all proportions.

Fjordman said...

CS: If that is the case then there's no basic difference between Bela and Little Green Footballs, who hate, hate, hate Europeans and European civilization much more than they dislike Islam, and thus end up siding with the latter against the former.

I haven't written a post about LGF for a long time, but frankly, this recent week and the disappearance of the Fallaci photo at their website makes it tempting. This is not about petty personal issues, it is about an all-pervasive hatred of anything European that demonizes absolutely anything Europeans do to protect their dignity and heritage.

Since Multiculturalism is an anti-European hate ideology, specifically designed to culturally, mentally and physically destroy people of European origins wherever they live, anti-European bigots, even those claiming to be "anti-Jihadists," will eventually end up supporting the Muslims and the Multiculturalists against Europeans.

The reason why hardcore anti-Semites (David Duke would be a case in point) are unreliable not just from a moral but also from a pragmatic point of view is that they hate Jews so much that it shuts down the rational parts of their brain and they end up making common cause with Muslims against Jews. Well, the same logic applies to hardcore anti-Europeans, of which there are many even at "conservative" websites such as LGF. They have an irrational hatred, a dark cloud in their minds which prevents them from seeing the world around them clearly. In a way, you could say that LGF-ers thus have something in common with David Duke, although I'm sure they'll hate my guts for saying so.

If mindless anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism should be considered a problem then so should mindless anti-Europeanism. It is hypocritical of LGF to focus on the two former while gleefully championing the latter.

I am tired of belonging to an ethnic group that people are actively encouraged to hate and will no longer accept bigotry from any quarter directed against my friends or family simply because they are who they are.

Conservative Swede said...

Fjordman,

In a way, you could say that LGF-ers thus have something in common with David Duke, although I'm sure they'll hate my guts for saying so.

Well, in my view it is not spectacularly bold to say that. There is a common pattern in the intense hatred of an ethnic group. Three groups that are especially hated are Russians, Germans and Jews. Some manage to hate all three. Regarding Bela, he manages to combine both from LGF and David Duke.

I haven't written a post about LGF for a long time, but frankly, this recent week and the disappearance of the Fallaci photo at their website makes it tempting.

Well, that's a good opportunity/reason for such a post. I predicted this already in October last year (links here and here):

"Charles needs to block himself off from reality completely, to be able to uphold two contradicting things: his photo of Oriana Fallaci on the sidebar of his blog, while doing all in his power to bring down our conference (a conference so bad to him that he considers it a no-brainer that Oriana wouldn’t have attended, and considers it arrogance off-the-scale to even suggest the idea)."

[It was Fjordman who suggested this, and Charles used Oriana to bang Fjordman back in the head (supposedly meaning that she would have opposed such "fascists").]

I concluded:
"The current witch hunt by Charles and his photo of Oriana in his blog are two things so wildly contradicting that it will tear him apart. The truth is there to be told. He won’t hear it right now, because there’s so much noise in that echo-chamber he has created for himself. But the truth will come out, and will eventually reach even Charles. What will he do? Take down the photo of Oriana as he took down the link to Gates of Vienna?"

Fjordman said...

CS: In the early 90s, Mohammed Rasoel in The Downfall of the Netherlands- Land of the Naive Fools stated that if there were no Scandinavians, the Dutch would be the "nicest" people in the world. Well, look how far that got them. As he indicated, they are too kind for their own good. Scandinavian Leftists are the most clueless people on earth, with the possible exception of Jewish Leftists. We need to evolve and become less nice, fast, or we will not survive this century.

It is more than a little ironic that I am called a racist, a Fascist, a neo-Nazi etc. several times before breakfast, yet my real character flaw may actually be that I am too kind and open-minded. This is a flaw I share with my entire civilization. Westerners are denounced for "Euro-centrism" whereas we have consistently for centuries been more willing to concede value to other cultures and see ourselves from the viewpoint of others than any other major civilization has been. Europeans, and Western Europeans in particular, are the least ethnocentrist peoples on earth, yet the only ones constantly derided for our ethnocentrism.

We have always had the capacity for self-criticism. What is new is that this has morphed into widespread self-hatred, at least among the chattering classes. It is unprecedented in the annals of human history that the intellectual elites of a major civilization hate their own people and culture so much that they actively side with their enemies in order to bring it down, yet this precisely is what our modern "intellectuals" do.

Those who hate us the most are white Marxists such as Expo in Sweden. Frankly, I have much more in common with individuals such as Ibn Warraq, Ali Sina and Patrick Sookhdeo than I have with them. They are defenders of European-derived civilization even though they were not born into it, whereas a number of people of European origins try to bring it down. It is highly unusual, possibly unique in world history, that a civilization is defended by people who used to be outsiders and attacked by many of the insiders.

Conservative Swede said...

I order to exapnd on what I wrote above:

Fjordman: "you could say that LGF-ers thus have something in common with David Duke"

CS: "There is a common pattern in the intense hatred of an ethnic group."


And when the intense hatred reach a certain level it becomes genocidal. In fact I start suspecting that this sort of intense hatred is always latently genocidal.

Let me explain what I mean by genocidal. According to the David Duke school of Jew hatred, the Jews do not have the right to exist in the West, and neither do they have the right to exist in Israel. They simply do not have the right to exist anywhere on this planet. Their very existence, wherever it appears is violently opposed. In such a case, the calls for genocide do not have to be made explicitly, it's already there implicit in the mindset. Whatever the Jews do, it's wrong, and they simply should just cease to exist.

Same with the anti-Europeans. Whatever the Europeans do, they are wrong. And pleasure and schadenfreude is expressed over how Europe is going to fall under Islamization. And if we fight back, we are evil fascist (Ralph Peters, another popcorn guy, suggests that American military will have to intervene to safe the lives of the Muslims). If we do not fight back we are surrender monkeys. We should be kicked out of the countries we colonized, but neither do we have the right to exist in our traditional homelands. The whole Western elite is anti-European and waging war against European people.

The Germans and the Russians are the most hated among the European peoples. The reason is simple I think. They are the two peoples that are most (potentially) powerful among the ones that are not architects behind the prevailing anti-European world order -- the architects being the Anglosphere and France.

The Germans are the most hated of all. Hatred of Russians and Jews become more visible since it gets triggered from the fact that both Russia and Israel acts with self-confidence. But the widespread hatred of Germans is much more intense, more latently genocidal. So the Germans make sure to stay put (avoiding even to cough too loudly) in order not to be exposed to this intensive hatred.

The more absolute the power, the more quiet the situation. The quiescence in Germany is almost total. There's no people on this planet that are as pushed down as the Germans. This sort of peace reminds me of the word salaam.

Conservative Swede said...

Fjordman,

Mohammed Rasoel in The Downfall of the Netherlands- Land of the Naive Fools stated that if there were no Scandinavians, the Dutch would be the "nicest" people in the world.

I followed your link and found this very nice passage, which I think is very true:

"If there were no Scandinavians, of who I don't know a whole lot, then without a single trace of doubt in my voice I would call the Dutch the nicest, most honorable, civilized, honest, objective, and outspoken people of the world, while my opinion about their social system, police, jurisdiction, education, etcetera, is equally high. ...

How can a people be so advanced in their thought while being so naive at the same time? Or the other way around: how can people as smart as the drug lords of Colombia or the master minds of the mob and yet be dumb enough to ignore the lives they wreck? The answer is easy: we only develop our brains in those areas where we train them. The story of the Dutch is simply the story of a people who lived so long in a neatly arranged society, and developed its kindness so far that it not only forgot what a mess looks like, but never developed the intelligence to keep itself clean: the Dutch don't see the mess around them and hence do not see a good reason to protect themselves against it."

Fjordman said...

CS: I have touched this subject before, in The Age of White Masochism

Jews were once told to “get back to Palestine.” When they did, they were told to “get out of Palestine.” The people who said this didn’t object to where Jews lived, they objected to the fact that they existed at all. I sometimes wonder whether whites of European descent, a global minority, are the Jews of the 21st century. I also notice that while people of European descent are told to “get back to Europe” in North America or Australia, whites in Europe are demonized if they resist being turned into a minority in their own countries. The problem then, apparently, isn’t where whites live, it’s that we exist at all.

Observer Ole Kulterstad notes that Europeans who are against free migration are labeled as “right-wing extremists.” But common sense indicates that giving away your country to alien cultures is more extreme than merely wanting to preserve it as it once was. I agree with him. I’m sick of hearing how Islamic organizations that want to destroy my civilization are called “moderates,” whereas Westerners are extremists if we resist, yet that is exactly what our media and our authorities do. We are not extremists; we are subject to policies that are extreme. Is gradually reducing a people to a minority in their own land, without proper debate about future consequences, not to be regarded as extreme?

Bela said...

fjordman:

We are discussing the same issues even though it happens under different but still closely connected titles.
My point is - what appears to be misunderstood consistently - that the current predicament is not a "deus ex machina" phenomena but the direct result of the voters preference in Europe.

There is a questionable tendency on our blog to accuse X Y Z politician with evil intentions and in the same time absolve the society which willfully voted for these people and keeps them in power.
Neither Stalin nor Hitler could have amassed the absolute power of destruction without the support of the masses: do you believe that Gordon Brown, only by himself could have institutionalized the Sharia in Britain without a complacent citizenry?
Please tell us how many people voted for BNP and how many for Labour:

"In the 2005 UK general election, the BNP received 0.7% of the popular vote," (Wiki)

The crux of our argument is that I have a very critical look on the European societies both East and West while other posters simply ignore the societal realities.
Should I admire or praise a society which is embarked on self destruction by their own volition?

Instead of scolding my opinion why don't we analyze the various European political movements and its evolution which led to the current crisis situation?
Why Europeans vote for Marxist government at free will?
Why there is no mass support for conservative parties - except for Italy's Lega Norte?
Why hoping for Russia to liberate Europe instead of doing it by themselves?

*******************************
About hate:
The most vile Anti-American, Anti-Nato, Anti-Eastern European posters are always welcomed on this forum but censoring the Sacrosanct demigod Russians amount to sacrilege.
Why don't you read some post in which Russia is called the savior of the White Race. Yes, White Race.
Savior of the European Civilization: an epic worship of KGB man Putin.

***********************************
fjordman: we don't have ideological differences at all, I have a un-PC, blunt syle to express my opinion, so my "tone" is too sharp for some.

Fjordman said...

CS: If we do accept that we, and by "we" I mean Europeans, are faced with an irrational hatred with some properties similar to anti-Semitism, then we have to assume, as you say, that it is also potentially genocidal against our people. Physical attacks against certain groups almost always start with this group being singled out and broken down with prolonged verbal attacks for years before.

Remember that in US universities and the Western education system in general, young people are taught that being "white" is something bad. Many seem to think that if you scratch any random European there is a Nazi lurking underneath, just waiting to get out. This is why the LGF-crowd have only two possible versions of Europeans: The appeasement surrender monkeys and the Nazis. If we are not the former, then it follows by logic that we have to be the latter. It's only a matter of time before they declare Geert Wilders, too, to be an "extremist." After all, like us, he doesn't believe in a moderate Islam, and he fights back.

Apart from personal issues, the dispute with LGF and their like involved several important subjects. One is the fight between those "anti-Jihadists" who believe in the myth of a "moderate Islam" and those who know better (us). Another is between those who believe in the concept of a "proposition nation" and those who believe a country has to be based at least partly on shared ethnicity, with the former viewing the latter as backward bigots who should be socially deconstructed or bombed. A third is widespread anti-European attitudes.

As you say, the highly dangerous concepts of a "proposition nation" and that man is homo economicus, the economic man, have been disproportionately championed by the English-speaking world. The pro-Islamic EU is a French idea. I don't see any rational reason for blaming the Germans this time around, yet many people still have a pathological hatred for them.

Fjordman said...

Bela: OK, but there is a huge difference between pointing out that people may have contributed to their plight and taking active pleasure in watching them become destroyed. As Conservative Swede points out, it is possible to sense the latter attitude in some of your comments.

But back to the original topic: LGF thinks that Europeans must prove that we are "ideologically pure" before we should be granted the right to fight for our continued existence. Imagine if your house is on fire. The fire brigade has just arrived to put out the fire, but the Politically Correct owner won't allow them to use the water because he fears it may be impure. He will only accept that they use holy water - distilled holy water - and only if it has been blessed by a lesbian priest who supports gay marriage and voting rights for illegal immigrants. Since the firefighters don't have this available, the man's house burns down, but he takes comforting in knowing that at least the remaining ash is ideologically pure. This is Little Green Football's attitude to the perils faced by the Western world.

I actually agree that hardened anti-Semites should be regarded with suspicion. They are unreliable and likely to ally with Muslims at some point based on common hatred of others. What annoys me is that anybody who happens to stand up for the rights of whites are automatically branded as "neo-Nazis."

I don't know who the hell came up with the concept that the Nazis were "pro-white." The Nazis were plain old evil, and they didn't just kill Jews of Gypsies. Most of the people who died due to their actions were other whites, some of whom were also regarded as subhumans.

Martin said...

"Neither Stalin nor Hitler could have amassed the absolute power of destruction without the support of the masses"

I think it is not fair to compare Russians with Germans in this case....

If I remember well, Nazis came to power by democratic means and then started with destruction of the system....

Contrary to that bolsheviks came to power by revolution, not by elections....and there was even civil war in Russia

Another disputable thing is that Stalin was supported by masses....Of course it depends on what is "masses" and what is "support" to you....

With terror and fear you can reign with support of active and brutal minority over majority very easily, it is same with communism, islamic theocracy or whatever form of totalitarianism...but I have to admit that even this perhaps was not true at the beginning, it probably changed after second world war (by the way...it is not much known, but when German army was near to Moscow, for some time was inside of the city real anarchy, people were drawing nazi swastikas on the sheets and many tried to destroy symbols of communism....so deep was the support of Stalin during the criticial moments of second world war :) )

Anyway I think Russia is the last country we can blame for our current state of affairs......

Communism was founded by Marx and Engels....I think it is not necesarry to remind you what nationality they were.....

Lenin was transferred to Russia from Switzerland thanks to Germans....

Multiculturalism and PC also do not have its foundations in Russia...its the western intelectualls in Europe and USA to whom we can thanks for.....

And you can dislike prewar Russia and its imperialism, but you cannot deny that tzarist regime has been the last bastion of conservatism in Europe....:))

Moreover if you want to blame Russia for its imperialism, you should also blame Great Britan, France and even United states:)

Oh and we should not forget that it was
Russia who wanted for centuries destroy Ottoman empire and there were western powers who prevented it....:)

I do not know if current Russia is saviour of white race, but current Russia is certainly not one who should be blamed for situation we are in.....

If I think about it, I agree with you, whatever happens, it will be always thanks or due to our societies and our people.

And we should try to save ourselves without intereferences of anybody or at least we should not count that someone will save us without any effort from our side....

I just hope that if we try there wont be anybody (be it Russia or USA ) who will actively support the other side....

Martin said...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7626099.stm

It seems Italy will be thanks to mafia very tough nut for islamists and immigrants from thirld world in general...

On the other hand if I am not mistaken it is mafia who is organizing human trafficking..so it is bit paradoxical situation...:)

Anonymous said...

We see (1) a Western Europe that allows and encourages and enables and finances Islamization and (2)any resistance to that Islamization severely punished and (3) very little popular support for conservative political parties whose members speak the truth publicly. That is what we read here with all these reports day after day, so why get mad about Bela's comments and call him anti-European?

We keep hearing that the majority of Europeans are against Islamization. If it is true, I can only ask, is the majority really that powerless? For they must be utterly powerless to have let things deteriorate so far and to have tolerated the staggering cluelessness (or treachery) of their leaders. But then how can they be the ones who keep voting for the appeasers and accomodaters and cultural-suiciders?

I don't understand at all this idea that Russia's resurging strength is interpreted as a hopeful sign for W. Europe. This is the Russia that aligns itself with the Muslim Middle East (certainly at least Iran and Syria) and aids the nuclearization of Iran. They also seem to have decided to self-identify themselves as non-Western. I certainly don't hate Russia or Russians, but how are they going to help exactly?

One of the reasons why I read GoV is to hear the news about how Europe is faring in the fight of her life. I fear the US is not too far behind. So far, I'm only rooting for the underdog all this time without seeing anything that leads to a realistic hope of the situation turning around before things get desperate. You have a few exceptionally courageous people, like Geert Wilders speaking out (and getting the plug pulled on him) and that's all. I do NOT want to see a major economic collapse or a mushroom cloud or a civil war as the only catalyst sufficient to wake people up - we would be facing the same problem from a much weaker position. The tide needs to be turned NOW. All those resisting, yes keep on, never give up, and additionally, for those who still believe there is a God and that He is good, pray. Pray without ceasing.

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

I think it's safe to say, wahtever Russia does, it will look out for Russia's interests and not give a jot about the west. At most we can look to Russia for inspiration but the idea that we should rely on it or trust it to save us is as daft as the idea that we should fight fight fight it no matter what.

Everyone, forget Russia. Seriously. Pro or anti, just forget the place and lets solve our own problems.

Baron Bodissey said...

remingtonquail --

We keep hearing that the majority of Europeans are against Islamization. If it is true, I can only ask, is the majority really that powerless? For they must be utterly powerless to have let things deteriorate so far and to have tolerated the staggering cluelessness (or treachery) of their leaders. But then how can they be the ones who keep voting for the appeasers and accomodaters and cultural-suiciders?

To help answer the question, think about the situation here in the United States. Opposition to our current suicidal immigration policy consistently polls at about 70%, sometimes higher, depending on how PC the wording of the question is.

Why, then, do both political parties consistently support open borders and amnesty? Why are opponents to mass immigration like Tom Tancredo confined to the margins? Why do Americans not throw the rascals out? Why do we elect one or the other Mexican-importing, NAU-supporting party, year after year?

The BNP may only poll at 0.7% (it’s much higher than that now, I think), but at least Britons have an alternative party to give their vote to. I can vote for Tweedledum or Tweedledee, but I can’t vote to end this farce.

Obviously, popular opinion is not enough to sway the issue. Other explanations must be sought.

One is that people who oppose immigration don’t consider it more important than other issues. In this country those other issues may be completely media-driven — national health care, economic issues, etc. — or they may transcend media, e.g. opposition to higher taxation.

In Europe people may vote the socialists in year after year because their well-being depends so thoroughly on the state. Pensions, disability checks, health care, housing, financing of the churches — the state does everything in Western Europe. It’s all very well to ask people to vote the bastards out, but if they sincerely believe that they will be out on the street and destitute, it’s hard for them to do that.

We’re all in a nasty pickle.

Homophobic Horse said...

This behaviour from the leftists is by no means unusual. They've always been like that. One must only look at the Ukraine Famine (a "Russian" atrocity according to contemporary revisionist bigots) to see the violence leftists are capable of.

Anonymous said...

Don't the people know that those mosques are built with money lavishly given by Saudi Arabia, the very same country which bans expatriates to hold common prayers, let alone to build churches. Pro-Koln views, I am sure, are shared by a huge majority of ethnic germans who have been emasculated by their recent history for a thousand years, just like the french who have been made feeling guilty for their colonial past.

Limpet said...

Fjordman wrote: "The reason why hardcore anti-Semites (David Duke would be a case in point) are unreliable not just from a moral but also from a pragmatic point of view is that they hate Jews so much that it shuts down the rational parts of their brain and they end up making common cause with Muslims against Jews."

You know very well that David Duke opposes any immigration from the third-world, muslim or not, whereas Jewish organizations want to continue mass immigration from the third-world, including muslim countries. So, I think you are the unreliable person here.

C.Swede wrote: "According to the David Duke school of Jew hatred, the Jews do not have the right to exist in the West, and neither do they have the right to exist in Israel. They simply do not have the right to exist anywhere on this planet."

Do you have information that David Duke has called for the expulsion of Jews from the West and for the destruction of Israel? I don't think so.

David Duke probably doesn't care about Palestine and Israel, and you should not care about what he thinks of Palestine and Israel. He is only interested in highlighting Jewish double standards. Jewish organizations will deny the right of white peoples to self-preservation and will push for population replacement, but they will simultaneously defend the right of Jews to have a Jewish state in Israel. I googled "right to exist" and "Jews have a right" on David Duke's website, and what I found confirms my opinion.

Another reason for an American to be annoyed at Israel is that American foreign policy seems to be dedicated to preserving Israeli interests, instead of American interests.

Fjordman wrote: "The pro-Islamic EU is a French idea."

Not from the French population at least. I think it is largely a Jewish idea.

Fjordman wrote: "The Nazis were plain old evil, and they didn't just kill Jews or Gypsies"

You sound like Jean-Marie Le Pen !

Martin wrote: "With terror and fear you can reign with support of active and brutal minority over majority very easily, it is same with communism, islamic theocracy or whatever form of totalitarianism..."

Russia at the time of the revolution was mostly a rural country, which made it even easier for a small violent minority living in cities to seize power. They only had to take control of a few institutions in Moscow. In some African countries too, it is relatively cheap to engineer a coup d'état and does not require many troops.

Graham Dawson wrote: "whatever Russia does, it will look out for Russia's interests and not give a jot about the west."

The USA should do the same, pull out of Iraq, and stop immigration. If I was a Russian, I would support some kind of independence for Chechnya so as to get rid of them, and so as to give them their legitimate freedom. I'm not sure Putin sees Russia's interests in the same way I do. And if I was an American, I would support the secession of the still relatively white states.

Conservative Swede said...

Fjordman,

Imagine if your house is on fire. The fire brigade has just arrived to put out the fire, but the Politically Correct owner won't allow them to use the water because he fears it may be impure. He will only accept that they use holy water.... Since the firefighters don't have this available, the man's house burns down...

The only thing missing is that he locks the women of the family into the burning house if they are not properly covered. (out of respect for oppressed minorities).

Bela said...

Given its sensitive aspect I take great care to find the correct diction and wording and be as clear as humanly possible.
We cannot deny the salient role the Jewish people play in our societies so let's take a closer, unbiased look at it.
Based on statistical evidences about 30% of the Jews are far removed from anything Leftist or Bolshevik, they were rather victims of the Reds than perpetrators.
I never ever conflate the Hungarian Edward Teller (H-bomb) with Chomsky or Soros.
When people talk about Nazi Germany I always add that there were many decent Germans like Marlene Dietrich who opposed Hitler and many paid dearly with their life.

The criticism goes against those who are members of the larger group within the Jewish establishment because their role in the destruction of EVERY society they set foot in is paramount and the destruction of their own homeland, Israel is in the works too.

The "spiritual" leader of almost every Anti-American, Anti-Israel group in the US is a Marxist Jew.
Spend a little time and check out the people's background who are surrounding the Mulatto Messiah and financing his radicalism.
It's an astonishing group of hard core Marxist.

Given its sensitive aspect I take great care to find the correct diction and wording and be as clear as humanly possible.
We cannot deny the salient role the Jewish people play in our societies so let's take a closer, unbiased look at it.
Based on statistical evidences about 30% of the Jews are far removed from anything Leftist or Bolshevik, they were rather victims of the Reds than perpetrators.
I never ever conflate the Hungarian Edward Teller (H-bomb) with Chomsky or Soros.
When people talk about Nazi Germany I always add that there were many decent Germans like Marlene Dietrich who opposed Hitler and many paid dearly with their life.

The criticism goes against those who are members of the larger group within the Jewish establishment because their role in the destruction of EVERY society they set foot in is paramount and the destruction of their own homeland, Israel is in the works too.

The "spiritual" leader of almost every Anti-American, Anti-Israel group in the US is a Marxist Jew.
Spend a little time and check out the people's background who are surrounding the Mulatto Messiah and financing his radicalism.
It's an astonishing group of hard core Marxist.

The hoopla around Obama is reminiscent to the Weimar Republic last days when the Spartacists, led by the Jewess Rosa Luxemburg, were about to take over Germany... and this act gave birth to Fascism and the horrors of the Holocaust.

Czechmade said...

Fjordman - your description of "Germans" is quite outdated. They have a much better image than for ex. French people TODAY, consider also regained respect for Germans/German culture in Israel.

For all - stop using the fairy term "Eastern Europeans", do you have in mind the movement of the armies short after the WWII? That´s a poor politology concept. Sense the history before and now, it should not be too difficult.

As for "Jews" in France, our comments must be ridiculous, since you have Maghreb Jews (only 250 000 from Morocco) and Alsass-Lothringen Jews with German names...I doubt we are able to write any meaningfull sentence about the Jews in France.

Forget Russians - only individuals with contempt for Russia are ready to identify with us. Focus on Ukraine - on these people with much less "Arab" pride and much more hard work to improve their lot.

Erich said...

I've noticed a tendency in the anti-Islam community, in their effort to explain the prevailing inertia of the West in the face of a revival of Islam, to conflate Marxist with Leftist, and then to blame all or most of that inertia on the Leftists.

While Leftism does stem from Marxism to a great extent, this is too simplistic (even anachronistic, since there was a Leftism prior to Marxism) and ignores a crucial dynamic.

This dynamic is apparently paradoxic: it is the dynamic of increasing sociopolitical influence concomitant with decreasing ideological virulence.

Thus we can lay it out sequentially:

Revolutionary Communism -->
Socialism -->
Leftism -->
Politically Correct Multi-Culturalism (PC MC).

Each preceding phase is more virulent, but less able to be sociopolitically influential without mass violence.

Each succeeding phase is less virulent, yet more able to be sociopolitically influential without mass violence.

Thus, Socialism is "Communism Lite"; Leftism is "Socialism Lite", and PC MC is "Leftism Lite".

PC MC so far is by far the most successful stage of this process -- it has been so successful that it has insinuated its values into the entrails, the hearts and minds even of the vast majority of those on the Right and in the Center.

In order to be this successful, there is a price to pay: the ideological purity has to be considerably watered down and decaffeinated. Nevertheless, the ideological component remains: the product is not harmless -- particularly with regard now to the single most important problem we face, that of a concrete revival of Islamic imperialist dreams, an Islam Redivivus. We are in a situation now where the vast majority of people even on the Right and in the Center are believers in several of the central axioms of the PC MC paradigm -- namely,

1) that Islam itself is harmless, and that only a small minority of "extremists" are causing problems in their effort of trying to "hijack" Islam

2) that all religions have their "extremists" and so there's nothing peculiar about Islam in this regard

and

3) that it is "bigoted" to expand the diagnosis of the problem to Islam itself and to too many Muslims -- please keep your analysis to a minimum of a very small minority of "extremists" so that we don't start veering into that "slippery slope" of condemning all Muslims!

Axiom #3 particularly stems from the fact that most people on the Right and Center throughout the West have swallowed the central PC MC dogma of Reverse Racism, whereby precious "ethnic" peoples can never have sociopolitical pathologies, and the only significant sociopolitical pathologies arise in the white West -- and if any sociopolitical pathologies are unavoidably noticed to occur among "ethnic" peoples, the explanation must somehow always lead back to how the white West has caused this, somehow, in one way or another.

If this were only a problem in the Leftist orbit, the West would not be as imperilled as it is. The situation is much more dire, for Leftism has been, over the past 50-odd years, sufficiently decaffeinated and repackaged in the new and improved form of PC MC to make it palatable -- at least with regard to certain issues -- to the majority of those on the Right and Center.

Not only has PC MC made Leftism palatable to the majority of those on the Right and Center -- it has made certain of its ingredients into the non-negotiable Recommended Daily Allowance of sociopolitical nutrition to the majority of those on the Right and Center.

Anonymous said...

In Europe the people may vote the socialists in year after year because their well-being depends so thoroughly on the state.

Yes, thanks, Baron, that does go a long way toward explaining the cognitive dissonance. Americans, listen up! Behold Europe's cautionary example. Value freedom over equality and reject the nanny-state. At least McCain was persuaded to backpeddle somewhat on his immigration stance.

Anonymous said...

Multiculturalism truly is a replacement Communism.

Replacement? It is Communism.

watling said...

Bela said:

"In the 2005 UK general election, the BNP received 0.7% of the popular vote," (Wiki)

Misleading (well, it is Wikipedia). In 2005 the BNP put up candidates in only 119 out of a possible 646 constituencies. i.e. 18%. So in 82% of the UK the voters could not possibly have voted for the BNP because there was no BNP candidate.

The BNP received 192,745 votes in the 2005 general election. Of the seats contested by the BNP, the party obtained 4.19% of the vote, which is 4.19/0.7 = 6 times higher than Wikipedia's half-truth. In particular, the BNP achieved a 5% or higher share of the vote in 34 constituencies.

Also, 130,000 Londoners voted for the BNP in this year's London Assembly election. Richard Barnbrook of the BNP was duly elected to the London Assembly.

Moral: don't believe what you read on Wikipedia