The UK Times had a story online about a recent clash between “Islamist extremists” and moderate Muslims. As the report explains, the altercation was a follow-up to the demonstrations that extremists had put on when the Royal Anglian Regiment marched in a homecoming parade through Luton:
Islamist extremists who made headlines with their protest at a parade for returning soldiers were forced off the streets yesterday by an organised demonstration of moderate Muslims.
There was a national outcry when the fundamentalists barracked members of the Royal Anglian Regiment during the troops’ homecoming in Luton in March.
Photographs of the protesters, brandishing banners with slogans such as “Butchers of Basra” and “Cowards, killers, extremists”, were plastered across the front pages of the next day’s national newspapers.
But the demonstration was also met with anger and dismay in the Bedfordshire town’s wider Muslim community.
That last sentence is news to me. I don’t doubt the dismay of the “wider Muslim community”. What is disturbing is how difficult it is to find stories in the press which report on any Muslims other than these professional haters and their signs. In fact, the Times makes that point when it says that the ugly pictures were “plastered across the front pages of the next day’s national newspapers”.
If the national newspapers talked to the moderates, they sure kept it quiet. However, the “moderates” themselves were no longer willing to tolerate the aftermath of the behavior of the extremists:
Moderate followers of Islam said the protest played into the hands of extreme right-wing groups and made their day-to-day lives on the streets of Luton more difficult.
Yesterday, [that would be May 29th - D] after weeks of rising tensions sparked by the protest, members of the two groups of Muslims clashed.
Qadeer Baksh, chairman of the Islamic Centre in Luton, said a group of around 200 moderate followers descended on Bury Park in the town - where the extremists regularly preach from a stall - to drive the protesters away.
Numbering about six, the extremists were surrounded and themselves barracked with calls of “We don’t want you here”, said Mr Baksh.
Scuffles broke out before police arrived, with the Islamists reportedly shouting back “Shame on you” and “Get back to your synagogue”.
Mr Baksh said: “The Muslims of Luton are totally fed up with these boys. Police were unable to get them off the streets and stop them bringing harm to the Muslim community so we had to.
“A small minority are giving us a bad name and allowing the British National Party to capitalise. They have made the place insecure for our women and children.
“The protest (in March) was the beginning of the problem. We have known about these misfits for years but even that small minority were able to cause us harm then because of the response of the press.” [my emphasis - D]
He’s nailed a good part of the problem right there. The focus of the news is always on mayhem and conflict. In fact, if journalists would quit pursuing these hoodlums, many of them would dry up and blow away for lack of press attention. This is just one of the ways newspapers create distortions in reality, i.e., by relentlessly choosing to highlight scum and trivia.
- - - - - - - - -
Mr Baksh said: “There were about 200 of us and just a few of them. We didn’t even let them put their stall up. This is not the end. This is just the beginning.”
Bedfordshire Police would not comment this evening on the incident but it is understood no-one was injured in the clash and no arrests were made.
It will be interesting to see if the “victims” push for their rights to free speech, claiming that a crime was committed when they were prevented from speaking. If so, the moderates will have legal fees. But I don’t doubt they know that already.
Another thing to notice is the fear moderate Muslims display regarding white flight to the BNP. That fear is well-founded. Those fleeing are aware that not only will no other party speak for them,but in addition the police will not protect them. Where else do they have to go at this point?
Did you notice the difference in emphasis between the original story in March and this one? The Luton ugliness, “plastered across the front pages”, was considered “news”. This second story was buried in the Times religion section, sans inflammatory photos.
Just another little spin on events by the gatekeepers.
NOTE: Yes, yes, I know. This demonstration by these fake moderates is simply taqiyya practiced to fool the simple-minded.
By now that meme is so facile, so stale and so tediously predictable that it has become boring. Here is fair warning: if anyone chooses to put up comments to that effect, I will delete them.
If you simply must have it said that these moderates are being devious, start your own blog and beat that particular drum there.
I think these people are genuine. You may not agree, which is why you need a place to post your opinions on the subject. This comment thread is not that place. It might have been at one point, and it may be so again in the future. But for this particular post on this particular story, I am not willing to go through another litany with antiphonal responses.
If that leaves nothing else to be said, that's all right, too, because the topic of this post is not the Muslims. My topic is the mendacity of the press and its willingness to cause harm in order to create a story.
Hat tip: Babs
64 comments:
The moderate meme has already been discredited at Harry's Place.
Look into it.
This has nothing to do with taqiya. This confrontation was extremists vs extremists. This has to do with tactics. The goal and sympathies are the same.
Liberal Muslims are a different story....they are the true moderates.
I think these people are genuine.
They may well be, regardless of any biased representation in the press. Then again, their anxiety could just as easily be a result of realizing that years of quiet acquiescence may have bought them swift deportation once the BNP gains power.
My own interpretation is that some British Muslims finally may be experiencing some buyer's remorse for voluntarily letting scumbags like Abu Hamza sell them a jihadi bill of goods for all these years.
An apt comparison would be that of how Saudi Arabia's king told Iran's Ahmadinejad to sit down and STFU at a recent confab. Perhaps, like the British Muslims, Saudi Sunnis are realizing that Iran's goading of Israel into launching their Samson Option could get all of them killed deader than dead.
Again, perhaps another twinge of buyer's remorse for having given free rein for so long to Islam's frothier brand of loons.
Rober Spencer says they're not even trying to hide it. "Moderate" Muslims who fought "extremists" not so "moderate" after all.
I did know a fair few muslims while I was at university. Most of them were liberal types, muslims in name only, rather like the christians or any other modern person who says they're of this or that faith but don't really believe it.
I think the term "moderate muslim" is a bit of a red herring. We're not after moderates, we're after liberal muslims. Free thinkers. The problem with looking for moderates is that they're the sort of people who will say "I don't want everything in shariah, just a bit of it". That creates a ratchet effect, where a moderate can progressively implement something in small pieces whilst a hard-liner will try to get you to swallow the entire thing in one go, and fail.
We want liberal muslims. Muslims who re-interpret their faith, who discard the literal interpretation of islam and replace it with one of metaphor and fairy tale. Islam doesn't have to be destroyed if it can be neutered in this way.
Where can I find out what these moderates believe? And in their own words... same with the liberals too.
Modr. muslims think that mohammad was a nice guy, caring, loving, empathic, selfless and just.
Some of them hearing of 1% of mohammads deeds become ex-muslims.
Many of them will simply follow the main-stream, when benefits appear at their mental screen. Grey masses.
Good. I see we're all starting to understand the Muslim mind.
Archonix: We want liberal muslims. Muslims who re-interpret their faith, who discard the literal interpretation of islam and replace it with one of metaphor and fairy tale. Islam doesn't have to be destroyed if it can be neutered in this way.
As with so many theories, this one looks better on paper than it is in real life.
Simply put, by having penalized apostasy with capital punishment for so many centuries, Islam has dug its own grave.
There are far too many pious Muslims who will cheerfully kill the sort of "liberal Muslims" you hope to recruit. What's more, the liberal Muslims you extoll are so infintesimal in number that they have essentially less than zero chance of successfully altering a doctrine that has intentionally been cut in stone for nearly a millennia.
By shutting the door to ijtihad, Muslim scholars took the easy way out, cemented their personal power structure and foredoomed Islam to crash against the rocks of superior military technology some time in its distant future.
That time has finally come and as Islam scrambles for nuclear parity, its own most radical elements are already groping about for WMDs whose use will cause a vast number of Muslims to die for the sins of their fathers.
There is no way to rescue Islam from itself. Centuries of gaming civilization in a most callous and cynical way find today's Muslims handcuffed to a jihadi juggernaut that, even now, careens towards the nuclear precipice.
The time to stop this insanity was centuries ago, but Islam was too full of itself and its string of brutal victories in the MENA (Middle East North Africa) region, India and the Malaysian peninsula to ever have paused to reconsider its savage ways.
Now, its own iron-age doctrine obliges it to joust against the far better armed West with outdated strategies and inadequate militaries. As Islam resorts to its time-tested tools of mass murder the civilized world reels aghast at the prospect of simply having to exterminate such an implaccable foe.
Islam is a developmentally retarded schoolyard bully that, by some miracle, has gained admission to university and is about to encounter a few well-trained pugilists from the boxing squad. The beatdown that is coming will be very lopsided and one from which Islam may well never recover.
Islam must be very careful about what it wishes for, because it is about to get it.
There's far too much freedom of the press. The press is out of control and frighteningly damaging to our society. There needs to be more control of the press ~ there is such a thing as too much freedom, especially when that freedom turns around and controls and destroys societies.
"Freedom of the press" means freedom to print your opinions. It is not restricted to journalism as we understand the modern meaning of the word but applies to all forms of mediaa from any citizen. The Media likes restricted freedom of expression because it gives them a monopoly on the dissemination of "truth", as they spin it. The answer is not more restriction on free speech, as we are currently facing in many countries, but less restriction. The only way to break the media monopoly is to remove speech regulations that give them that hold in the first place.
I think that the initial story, when those Islamic wingnuts protested at our troops' homecoming, should have been reported, and needed to be reported.
And if the "friendly" Muslims knew about those "extreme" Muslims for years, but did nothing about them, what is one to think about that?
Having said all that, I would quite like to see a certain Mr. Choudary getting a chap on the chin from a fellow beardie. That definitely should be on Sky News.
"The answer is not more restriction on free speech, as we are currently facing in many countries, but less restriction. The only way to break the media monopoly is to remove speech regulations that give them that hold in the first place."
Can you explain more? I'm not quite understanding. Who is imposing the restrictions and the speech regulations?
I'm a streamlink member to Coast to Coast AM. There was just a caller who claimed to be an retired soldier who had actually fought in ME and had personal experience fighting muslims. He claimed the saudis are dead scared of the iranians and that the only thing the iranian theocracy, Ahmadinejad and the mullahs are interested in is Armageddon and thus bringing forth the fifth imam. This caller appears somewhere in the fourth segment should anyone else here be a subscriber as myself. So is this why they are so eager to get nuclear capabilities? To bring destruction on both dar al-harb and dar al-islam alike as long as their holy fifth imam returneth to pass judgement on believers and kufr alike?
Robin Shadowes - certainly sounds crazy enough for Muslims to be considering. But what's really crazy is that they think the West will stand by and watch it happen. I'm beginning to think these Muslims are as wishful thinking as the liberals.
Archonix: The only way to break the media monopoly is to remove speech regulations that give them that hold in the first place.
Absolutely! This is why the MSM is so terrified of the Internet and the reason for so much talk about shutting down conservative sites by using hate speech lawfare.
As Geert Wilders noted, all hate speech laws need to eliminated. The only reason they ever came into existence is that law enforcement took a lax approach to crimes like gay bashing and those minority status groups were able to obtain special legislation that increased their protection.
As written, the constitution and uniform legal code all protect individuals quite well, so long as the police and law enforcement officers do their job correctly. We DO NOT need any enhancements to these constitutional and statute protections.
Coffee Catholic: Can you explain more? I'm not quite understanding. Who is imposing the restrictions and the speech regulations?.
Can you say, "anti-blashphemy laws"? What about, "Fairness Doctrine"?
"Don't tell me that words don't matter."
- Barrack Hussein Obama -
Have you noticed how your submissions to this web site are not greeted with the message you find at so many Liberal blogs? Namely, "comment pending approval". To his eternal credit, the Baron prohibits very little in the way of polite speculation or contribution. This site has already risen from the ashes of being scorched for simple speculation about Europe's future.
Imagine how badly the Liberal Left wants to muzzle places like this permanently.
One need look no further than the OIC and UN attempts at passing anti-blasphemy penalties into WORLD LAW.
Robin Shadowes: He claimed the saudis are dead scared of the iranians and that the only thing the iranian theocracy, Ahmadinejad and the mullahs are interested in is Armageddon and thus bringing forth the fifth imam.
Robin, you are largely correct. Although it is actually the twelfth imam, the rest of your post is on target.
This is what I alluded to with my original post in this thread when I noted how:
"An apt comparison would be that of how Saudi Arabia's king told Iran's Ahmadinejad to sit down and STFU at a recent confab. Perhaps, like the British Muslims, Saudi Sunnis are realizing that Iran's goading of Israel into launching their Samson Option could get all of them killed deader than dead."
So is this why they are so eager to get nuclear capabilities? To bring destruction on both dar al-harb and dar al-islam alike as long as their holy fifth imam returneth to pass judgement on believers and kufr alike?.
Yes. The "twelvers" (followers of the twelfth imam), all firmly believe that their messiah will emerge from his water well sanctuary when the fate of Islam is ultimately imperiled and can only be saved by divine intervention.
Remember, Muslims see death as a trivial inconvenience at worst and the gateway to paradise on any other day. Therefore, even if Shiite efforts to summon the twelveth imam only succeed in getting everyone killed, it's just that many more Muslims in paradise and so many unbelivers now roasting in eternal Hell.
This is the problem in dealing with a death cult. There is no down side for the fanatically pious.
It is why you saw the very wealthy and comfortably well-off Saudi king slapping down Iran's mad dwarf. The royals have everything to lose, unlike the vast bulk of impoverished Muslims.
It is important to note that Muslims are specifically kept destitute by their clerical power structure so that they will continue being disgruntled and willing to employ violence towards bettering their lot.
Remember, prosperity is bad for jihad.
The goal of democracy, according to Al-Ayyeri, is to "make Muslims love this world, forget the next world and abandon jihad ." If established in any Muslim country for a reasonably long time, democracy could lead to economic prosperity, which, in turn, would make Muslims "reluctant to die in martyrdom" in defense of their faith.
I hope this clarifies things a bit.
Since the dogmas of Islam, enshrined eternally and unchangeably in the Koran and Hadiths, are NOT moderate, or liberal, they cannot produce moderates or liberals.
Only open jihadists and stealth jihadists... or apostates.
And the penalty for apostasy is death in Islam.
I trust only the apostates.
Who risk their lives opposing Islam.
Because they have acknowledged the truth of Mohammad and his vicious "faith".
Thanks for correcting me about the imam. That is the downside of multitasking, doing things simultaneously and having your thoughts wandering while typing. Sometimes you get things mixed up.
"It is why you saw the very wealthy and comfortably well-off Saudi king slapping down Iran's mad dwarf. The royals have everything to lose, unlike the vast bulk of impoverished Muslims."
Indeed their lifestyle is far from anything the majority of poor muslims could even dream of. Of course they don't want to loose all that. So the question is, why do they keep bankrolling the salafists and wahhabists then? Why don't they exterminate them like the cockroaches they are? After all, not even extremists like Al-Qaeda or the taliban have any love for the saudi royalties. Looks more to me that they are digging their own graves in reality...
Robin Shadowes: So the question is, why do they keep bankrolling the salafists and wahhabists then? Why don't they exterminate them like the cockroaches they are?.
The House of Saud has a devil's pact with the kingdom's Wahhabist clergy. It is what allowed them to take power and there is a limit regarding how much they can restrain these radicals.
A principal reason Saudi Arabia continues to finance international terrorism is to export it to other countries where these loose cannons will either murder lots of us infidels or get themselves killed. A win-win situation for the House of Saud either way you cut it.
It is another reason why all of the terrorist madrassahs are in Pakistan. Saudi fanatics are shipped off to that skank backwater hellhole, kept out of the way and then sent out to commit their atrocities in the West.
Looks more to me that they are digging their own graves in reality...
In their towering hubris, the House of Saud cannot possibly imagine that the West will ever grasp the full depth of their duplicity nor summon the grit to finally blast them from their blood drenched thrones.
A time of reckoning is coming and Saudi Arabia's future is among the bleakest there can be with respect to the Muslim majority nations. Only the illusions bred by their massive wealth insulate them from a complete understanding of just how tenuous their perch upon this mortal coil actually is.
Dymphna, you hopeless, incurable pollyanna! Have you forgotten the LGF barnyard cry (taken from Animal Farm)
"Muslims Bad! Four Legs Good!"
And Archonix has already pointed out that the stooge Islamohater intellectual Robert Spencer has already jumped onto the "taqiya" bandwagon.
You see, Dymphna, if there are "moderate" Muslims then they all can't be deported to make Europa Muslim-rein. And that goes against the Fjordman-Spencer-Atlas-Bat Y'eor-Bostum-DeWinter orthodoxy. So it must be discounted.
Well, the litmus test for any "moderate" Muslim is to ask him what he thinks about infidels and their right to live in an Islamic land without paying Jizya or being physically harmed (and use a lie detector to check the honesty of the answers). Basically, most of them will say they have nothing against it, but the Armenians provoked the Turks (or the Coptic Christians provoked the Muslim Egyptians, etc.), so they deserved their fate. And speaking about the archetypal example of Islamic genocide, they will say the tribe Banu Qurayza was justly punished by the prophet for causing mischief in the land. Notice: these will be the moderates. I mean, not the "convert or die" type, but the "a punishment here and there for mischief in the land" kind.
But who knows, maybe some of them will not offer these predictable answers. And maybe Tooth Fairy really exists. I want to be a believer.
Nodrog: And Archonix has already pointed out that the stooge Islamohater intellectual Robert Spencer has already jumped onto the "taqiya" bandwagon.
Did you even bother to read Spencer's article? You know, the one where he quotes directly from the so-called moderate Islamic Centre of Luton and its "Fight Against Extremism", wherein they proclaim:
The Jews shall NEVER have peace of mind or feel secure, or arrive at the level of safety that they seek. This is a dream that shall remain unfulfilled because they do not seek to extend the same to others. All attempts at seeking to facilitate this unattainable peace shall end in failure. They shall continuously be under siege as has been ordained by Allaah as He has said:
“And (remember) when your Lord declared that He would certainly keep on sending against them (i.e. the Jews), till the Day of Resurrection, those who would afflict them with a humiliating torment.” [7:167]
You have misread what Archonix posted and made yet more a spectacle of yourself.
A pollyanna would be someone who screeches about a threat that doesn't exist, n'est pas? Methinks dymphna shows the ever so admirable tendency to give people the benefit of the doubt, something gordon seems incapable of doing.
Currently toasted on something french and grape related. Hey gordon, misread this: bite me.
Archonix: A pollyanna would be someone who screeches about a threat that doesn't exist, n'est pas?.
Sounds more like a Chicken Little than a Pollyanna to me.
Pollyanna:
noun
Definition:
eternal optimist: an unrealistically optimistic person
None of which changes the fact that Nodrog clearly neglected to read Spencer's article.
Zenster, thanks for your answer. It makes more sense now. I have no illusions of benevolence when it comes to that family. If I'm not mistaken they came to power in the 20's or 30's virtually by murdering their way to the top. So they're basically nothing but scoundrel throat-cutting desert rats.
Gordon is great when it comes to offering his support for hypothetical victims against hypothetical aggressors. So if non-Muslims ever launch an unprovoked jihad against Mohammed's followers he'll be quite the asset.
Meanwhile, for clarity, here is a news story from Aftenposten concerning statements made by Mullah Krekar of Norway:
---
"We're the ones who will change you," Krekar told Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet in his first interview since an uproar broke out over cartoons deemed offensive to Muslims.
"Just look at the development within Europe, where the number of Muslims is expanding like mosquitoes," Krekar said. "Every western woman in the EU is producing an average of 1.4 children. Every Muslim woman in the same countries are producing 3.5 children.
"By 2050, 30 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim."
---
Now consider Gordon's stance, that the impetus of some Europeans to deport Muslims from Europe is wicked and malicious. He calls it "Muslim-rein", evoking Hitler's "Judenrein", as if repatriating Arab and Berber immigrants back to the Middle East and North Africa were the equivalent of the worst genocide of the 20th century.
The actual, publicly stated imperial project of somebody like Mullah Krekar of Norway is not considered relevant to Gordon because the Muslims are a minority in that country. Perhaps if Muslims pass the 51% demographic mark in Norway dear Gordon will lend his crucial moral support to Fjordman. That would be quite a boon and I think we would all be greatly satisfied.
Zenster,
You talk about Islam's "Iron age weaponry" fighting against "a hopelessly superior opponent" -- Well, hear this "hailing frequency" translated with the time-phasing shifter (good common sense and a wish to face reality.
People of the West--
"(Millitary) Strength is irrelevant,
Submit to the way of Survival,
We will add YOUR biological and technological distinctiveness to our own,
You will be assimilated,
YOUR CULTURE WILL ADAPT TO SERVICE OURS"
All of this quotes, except for "Submit to the way of survival [Shariah]"(which replaces "resistance is futile") are ORIGINAL DECLARATIONS OF THE BORG (in Star Trek) but they explain the Modus Operandi of the Islamists to a tee.
The only reason Islam was not a conquering force in the past few centuries is that "western imperialism/colonialism caused a disruptive discontinuity in the space-time continum, that like a wormhole, put the islamists back in another quadrant (knocked Islam off track for a few hundred years). However, the delusional leftists have patched this space-time discontinuity; AND (in the drive to eradicate "western Imperialism") are powering the "warp drive" that is bringing "the Reality Borg" back into our sector at Warp Speed.
War is NOT the threat, israel will set Iran's program back again somehow.
Islamists are rational, cunning, and sophisticated; and what's more, they are constantly adding Western technology and tactics to the cunningness of their own. Meanwhile, the Left is doing all it can to tear down its own society, and even secular values.
You fail to gauge how drastically different the world is from even 10-15 years ago. When you look at What Barack Hussein Obama says (about Islam and other things), one can understand how much weaker the West will be (vis-a-vis Islam) 10-15 years from now.
I recommend we start thinking of this conflict in 21st Century Science fiction [in this case reality] terms, for that may be the only way many people can grasp what is going on.
“A small minority are giving us a bad name and allowing the British National Party to capitalise. They have made the place insecure for our women and children."
I think this is actually part of the strategy of the Islamists. They want the Muslims who are not yet engaged in the physical/ideological struggle to be persecuted. Once this happens, they can claim victimhood status and start the rallying cry to "liberate" the "oppressed Muslim brothers and sisters". Also, keep in mind the various doctrines related to the "Covenant of Security" that a Muslim supposedly lives under in non-Muslim lands.
The Islamists benefit when Muslims in kafir lands are subjected to hardship.
Watching Eagle: The only reason Islam was not a conquering force in the past few centuries is that "western imperialism/colonialism ... knocked Islam off track for a few hundred years.
I think you give European intervention, such as the Crusades or Balfour Declaration, far too much credit.
Islam has always been its own worst enemy. Nearly a millennia ago the ulema reached a concensus that Islam was perfect and there could no longer be allowed any independent interpretation of the Qu'ran and its associated works by those lacking in scholarly training. This is when the door to ijtihad (the process of making a legal decision by independent interpretation) was closed forever, thereby cutting Islamic doctrine in stone.
It was at this point that non-liturgical music fell from grace, questioning physical reality became haram (much as in Medieval Europe) and was declared blasphemous along with numerous previously healthy schools of investigation that were abolished as being non-essential to the overarching task of indoctrination, with their now perfected dogma.
After all, during the 19th century did invading Europeans set about wrecking all factories, libraries and medical research centers throughout the MME (Muslim Middle East)? They most certainly did not. This is because there were few if any large scale industrial or educational facilities to be destroyed even if the Europeans had wanted to.
Stagnation like that which persists to this day in the MME cannot be imposed or arrived at in a dozen decades or so. It takes centuries of stifling creative thought and strangling innovation in the cradle to achieve the sort of self-imposed stasis found within the MME. This was Islam's own doing and Islam's alone.
Islamists are rational, cunning, and sophisticated; and what's more, they are constantly adding Western technology and tactics to the cunningness of their own. Meanwhile, the Left is doing all it can to tear down its own society, and even secular values.
I would hesitate to use the word "rational" when describing Islamists or even Muslims in general. A rational mind balks at such notions as:
"The 9-11 attacks were staged by America to justify its war upon Islam and Osama bin Laden is a hero for blackening the Great Satan's eye!"
or ...
"Jews invented the Holocaust to evoke unwarranted sympathy for their cause from the Europeans and we intend to finish the job that Hitler started!"
Both of the foregoing statements are common currency within the MME. Both of them exhibit almost terminal levels of Cognitive Dissonance. This is hardly the domain of a rational mind.
Furthermore, the ability of Muslims, and Arabs in particular, to adopt "Western technology and tactics" is far more limited than you seem to think. I invite you to read Norvell B. De Atkine's superb work, "Why Arabs Lose Wars". (Please Google the title as blogger is not accepting the link.)
After reading it, I doubt that you will persist in imagining Islam to be the asslaminating Borg-like enemy they pretend to be.
You fail to gauge how drastically different the world is from even 10-15 years ago.
This is amusing as I often find myself to be a lone voice in the wilderness seeking to alert people to how models even just ten years old fail to describe the accelerated time line that the Western world is confronted with as the MME pursues nuclear parity. You are preaching to the choir, at best.
I continue to maintain that slow jihad will not be the ultimate deciding factor in Islam's war on the West. Far too many radical Muslims exist for jihad not to escalate into a nuclear conflict long before demographic replacement becomes an issue. While defending ourselves from Muslim colonizers is still a good thing, we had best focus ourselves upon the Total War that is in progress and devise exactly how we will wage that Total War before it engulfs us entirely.
Sepher Shalom: I think this is actually part of the strategy of the Islamists. They want the Muslims who are not yet engaged in the physical/ideological struggle to be persecuted. Once this happens, they can claim victimhood status and start the rallying cry to "liberate" the "oppressed Muslim brothers and sisters".
This is an excellent point and one that obviates any need to debate taqiyya, which is much like trying to prove a negative anyway.
Islam feeds upon misery, particularly that of Muslims. If the suffering is not present, it will be made to appear. Victimhood is some sort of obscene raison d'être within Islam and it cannot be truly happy without something to complain about. Again, this goes back to Cognitive Disonnance and the Muslim mindset.
Since jihad is the cornerstone of Islam, it must perpetually find new excuses to expand its territory. Witness the reconquista and even more ridiculous claims that Muslims discovered America which they use solely as justification for reclaiming these ostensibly once-Islamic lands.
No amount of bloodshed is too much for Islam. More Muslim deaths mean more martyrs and that many more admissions to paradise. For Islam, there simply is no downside to even the very worst slaughter.
The only thing that cannot be tolerated is for unbelievers to prevail. This is a totally unacceptable outcome.
As an illustration of this, consider how some radical imams would rather see every man, woman and child on our entire earth perish, with Muslims in their paradise and the infidel roasting in eternal Hell, rather than share this planet with even a single unbeliever.
This is how much Islam loves death.
Islamists are rational, cunning, and sophisticated; and what's more, they are constantly adding Western technology and tactics to the cunningness of their own. Meanwhile, the Left is doing all it can to tear down its own society, and even secular values. --- Watching Eagle
You are absolutely correct. Muslims and Islam are not a threat to the West, without the Western Left using its significant power to help them.
The real threat to the West is not Islam or Muslims, but the Western Left.
Just as a clarification, the West is powerful enough to deal with any threats to itself from Islam or Muslims, and Muslim countries. It is the Western Left's anti Western belief system, self hatred, guilt, or whatever that is driving them to destroy the West or aid in the commission of cultural and civilizational suicide.
We have met the enemy and its still the Western Left.
EscapeVelocity: The real threat to the West is not Islam or Muslims, but the Western Left.
While the Left is certainly a significant issue, time constraints oblige us to ignore this harmful tresspasser within the body politic and focus upon the immediate existential threat.
Simply put, we do not have time to wage an internal civil war that would leave us exhausted in the face of our most pressing and dire enemy.
We must defeat Islam now and, bearing its lessons in mind, then set about prosecuting jihad's fellow travelers without mercy.
Well, good luck with that, while the Western Left is the government of your nations and political bodies, courts, media, and indoctrination centers(I mean schools).
As well as running immigration policy.
You see what I mean?
EscapeVelocity: Well, good luck with that, while the Western Left is the government of your nations and political bodies, courts, media, and indoctrination centers (I mean schools).
Exactly what strategy do you propose? I've made mine very clear. Let's hear yours.
The reason why Islam and Muslims are an existential threat to Europe and Europeans and European culture and society is because of the Western Left.
Without the Western Left aiding and abetting, Islam and Muslims are no threat to Europe, Europeans, or European culture, society or nations.
Like it or not, the West is already divided and fighting a intra-cultural civil war....one in which the Western Left(enemy of the West) are very very powerful.
I didnt see your proposal...but waging total war on Islam will be impossible with the powerful Western Left knee capping you.
Somebody suggested that prosperity can kill the extremism, supremacism, and violence of Islamics towards others. I think that is ultimately wishful thinking.
But it did work for Europe, a deChristianized Europe loves hedonist life so much (and there is nothing to look forward to which would offer something of worth to sacrifice his/her life for....nothing worth fighting for. That is why the impetus is to import Muslims to have babies and support their welfare bennies until they die, because they couldnt be arsed to have their own children which would require sacrificing their enjoyment of this life.
Oh the Western Left has done much damage to the West.
But I dont think this will work on Islam. Christianity is a much different religion which produced much different socieities.
But I do think that pursuing some of the Lefts tactics and strategies which worked so well on the West and Christianity should be supported and employed to attack Islamic Civilization. Feminism for example, is a powerful weapon, which causes disuinity and conflict at several levels, attacking patriarchal Islam directly, as well as society, and last but probably most importantly the family...the basic unit of civilization.
EscapeVelocity: Somebody suggested that prosperity can kill the extremism, supremacism, and violence of Islamics towards others. I think that is ultimately wishful thinking.
If you followed my previous link about prosperity, you would already know that it terrifies radicals. However, there is nowhere near enough time for prosperity, education or other long-term approaches to take sufficient effect.
One of the only effective pre-emptive measures that can be taken is to have Western Special Forces eliminate the top 1,000 to 10,000 jihadist Muslims. Islam's clerical, academic, financial and political elite must perish.
This is one of the only ways of forestalling Total War and, most likely, the immolation of one or more Western cities in terrorist nuclear attacks. Retaliation to such nuclear terrorism would likely kill tens or hundreds of millions of Muslims. Targeted assassinations would save Muslim lives.
If we do not have the will to pre-empt Islam, we will descend into Total War within less than two decades. There are few alternatives. Some of the only ones being pre-emptive nuclear strikes upon several large Muslim cities or a halt to all grain shipments to the MME (Muslim Middle East), which would bring about mass starvation in less than six weeks.
The alternative is losing priceless heritage and having the world's economy set back by decades.
Again, what do you propose? Please do not waste my time with fantasies about purging leftists from government, academia and media. We have neither time nor resources for that outside of due process.
Islam must be dealt with militarily and, preferably, pre-emptively.
Well, I grant you that the welfare statist/prosperity attack on Islam/Muslims will have an effect. And is just one of a many pronged approach (developed by the Western Left) to attack a civilization and religion. Even the Israelis favor peace through economic prosperity for Palestinians. This however does not address the aggressive supremacism of Islam, which is still a big problem...and why its effectiveness as shown in the West will not be as effective or complete in Islamic societies.
I think you are kidding yourself about total war...especially with the Western Left kneecapping you. Western Europe may descend into a civil war in areas. It will be a regional thing, just like Pakistan is fighting one right now.
That is pretty certain to happen unless you stop immigration, kowtowing to Islam, and start with strong deportation/repatriation programs for Islamists while you are still in the majority in your large cities.
I agree that Islam long term will continue to be aggressive and a would be existential threat to everyone who is not a muslim. But a policy of containment can work wonders in the meantime...and attacking them in the manner developed by the Western Left to undermine Western Civilization.
Waste your time? You are the one fantasizing about total war, when the Western Left is indoctrinating Western children in schools, dominates the media and the political discourse, is attacking dissent through hate speech legislation (the thought police - this is re-education camp/gulag light), the courts are filled with Leftwing judges, and Leftwing coalitions have at minimum political parity with the Western Right.
This is a long war. Time to start thinking strategically.
School Choice
Media penetration and infiltration (not just alternative bandwidth media)
Court appointments
Purging cirricula of PC and Leftwing indoctrination
Address immigration
Lawfare
Promote Christianity
Above all stop the denigration and villification of Western Civilization in the core of Western institutions.
We can reduce the number of Muslims on the planet from 1.5 billion ot several hundred million in seconds, sheets of glass. But I hope it doesnt come to that. Maybe the prophecies of those discredited religions are true, heh? The apocolypse is nigh, with the Jews in the promised land in the middle.
Lets see if we can hold off on that for a while.
BTW, Ive pondered the food embargo, myself. Its also an alternative to bring the Muslim World to its knees. Like I said, the West is very powerful, Islam is not a threat to it, except for the Western Left (the 5th Column).
But I certainly hope that Europe increases its military budgets and finally spends the money necessary to defend itself. As an American, Im tired of footing that bill, so that the Euros can lounge around on their welfare bennies and sneer at us while doing so. But alas, I dont see that happening, do you? Why, those pesky Western Leftists and the damage they have done and continue to do to European Civilization.
EscapeVelocity: This is a long war. Time to start thinking strategically.
It's a "long war" until the first nuclear device is detonated. After that, things will procede very quickly. I do not care if it requires pre-emptively striking a dozen Muslim cities to prevent one single terrorist nuclear attack in America or Europe. Any major Western city contains more art, industry and historical legacy than the entire MME (Muslim Middle East).
Please read Wretchard's, "The Three Conjectures", if you have not done so already.
I have already noted my prefered method of minimizing any loss of human life. If Islam forces our hand, then all bets are off and they can take the hindmost.
This one is for all the marbles and we need to address the situation on that basis.
Well, if a nuke goes off in the US, then I will certainly support the sheets of glass approach.
However, I dont support a pre emptive nuclear strike.
The key is to gain control of your culture and nations, so that you have a credible threat of nuclear anialation, instead of a government and half the population talking about self flagelating "root causes" and blaming the West for the nuclear destruction of (fill in the blank) city and its millions of people.
The less credible the threat the more likely the occurence.
Again, I hope it doesnt come to that, but their are certainly a bunch of Islamo-maniancs willing to try.
That is why I favor a containment policy. You will see that Israels carnage went way down, even with just a partial seperation of the so called "apartheid wall."
BTW, Israel will become a model for Europe on how to deal with its aggressive violent Muslim populations in a very short time....unless of course Europe grows some balls and starts repatriation programs.
"It's a "long war" until the first nuclear device is detonated. After that, things will procede very quickly. I do not care if it requires pre-emptively striking a dozen Muslim cities to prevent one single terrorist nuclear attack in America or Europe. Any major Western city contains more art, industry and historical legacy than the entire MME (Muslim Middle East)."
That is one of the things that worries me the most, losing our cultural and historocal heritage. If it will be lost in a nuclear attack or simply deliberately destroyed by simpler means like the ancient Buddha-statues in Afghanistan only time can tell. The priceless art in the Sistine Chapel alone is worth more than all of the art of MME. Then add the Louvre, Prado, Tate Gallery, British Museum, Guggenheim etc.
And that's just pictorial art. Then we have all the music produced over the centuries and all the litterature. Having all this detroyed forever makes the ransacking of the Alexandrian library seem like nothing in comparison. And I don't mean to dimidns that event at all. Hadn't all those ancient scrolls been destroyed, many historical mysetries would probably not have been any mysteries at all and many other events would have been much clearer that they perhaps are now. If all this is lost, there will be a new dark age and it might last a lot longer than the last one, perhaps for a millenia or more. So there are more at stake than just human lives here.
Both the leftists and the muslims is intending to rewrite human history if they win, the former in a more marxist way and the latter in muslim way of course. Thus the discovery of America by muslims will eventually become truth, then dogma and then cut in stone
forever. Our homegrown islamist Mohammed Omar has his "theories" about the vikings actually being muslims. If they win, who is going to dispute him? No-one will dare to do that and it will form into dogma as well. All artifacts that supports a past with vikings as kufr will be destroyed.
With this perspective I'm willing tp do anything to save our culture even if it means nuking the MME to glass and all the lives that will be lost in such attacks. Remember, it was they who started the conflict in the first place. It is them who wants to submit the whole world to the savagery of islam. It was their choice to wage war against dar al-harb. As Zenster pointed out, this is one of the pillars of islam itself. Thus there is no point trying to parley with the muslims. It will only lead to a temporary hudna. And another hudna. Then another hudna and yet another hudna and so on ad infinitum.
I believe we must first deal with the fifth columnists in our midst, the mainstream politicans (mostly leftists but not always, some are liberals as well) and the MSM. Whatever we do, they will counteract it immediately and they have lots of power and resources while we have virtually nothing. Thus we must first deal with them before we focus on the muslim threat. However, Zenster has some intersting ideas of how to win time. Taking out radical islmaist leaders is such a one. Many have witnessed about muslims on street level. They say if a gang of thugs is making trouble, take out their leader first. Most oftenly the rest of them will flee after that or they become so stunned that it will give you time to escape. This I think speak volumes about muslims as warriors.
"We're the ones who will change you," Krekar told Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet in his first interview since an uproar broke out over cartoons deemed offensive to Muslims.
The muslims are getting more cocky. They think the defeat of the west is a done deal already. Could also be part of a psychologiacal warfare against us kufr. To demoralize us. Sending the message that there is no hope of winning so you better join us instead. Something like that.
EscapeVelocity: That is why I favor a containment policy. You will see that Israels carnage went way down, even with just a partial seperation of the so called "apartheid wall.".
I used to support a containment policy until I realized that it simply WILL NOT work on the scale being proposed.
Please read the works of El Ingles here at GoV. He covered this point in previous essays and reaches some very disturbing conclusions.
Also, thank you Robin for emphasizing the tremendous loss of heritage faced by the West.
Remember, Muslims have NOTHING TO LOSE. They've got squat and want to steal everything from us. WE HAVE EVERYTHING TO LOSE and it is about time we started acting like it.
I used to oppose first use of nuclear weapons for any reason. That is no longer the case and it is the subject of a forthcoming essay I will submit to GoV.
Islam counts upon the West flinching right when it must act without hesitation. We must overcome our compunction regarding loss of human life and set about making sure that it is not our own lives that are lost. Period.
This post has been cited in my updated map.
Zenster,
With regard to nuclear war, Let me say something: I don't know if the current Leftist government's of the West would retaliate if a Nuclear attack happened in a major western city. I do know that a Western response will be less likely ten years from now than it would be now (assuming the left is in power). This is one dimension of how things have changed.
On the other hand, muslims could use nuclear weapons to get concessions-- but they already can get concessions at every turn by alleging "western imperialism". They may not choose to nuke the West because they have infiltrated it well.
Concerning my claim that "muslims ate rational, cunning, and sophisticated" I am talking about survival and conquest aspects of a culture. Islam is very rational in its focus to survive and surmount other cultures. The problem is that the Left doesn't even think the West has to struggle for survival, and this is highly irrational.
Zenster clearly isnt rational, if he thinks that anybody in the West is going to launch a first strike nuclear attack on anybody.....much less total war on Islam. Especially with the Western Left in power, and Leftwing indoctrinated voting blocks in concert with massive new immigrant and Muslim voting blocks.
EscapeVelocity: Zenster clearly isnt rational, if he thinks that anybody in the West is going to launch a first strike nuclear attack on anybody.....much less total war on Islam.
Clearly, you haven't been paying attention. I suggest you Google a document titled: (Note: Blogger is not accepting my links)
"Towards a Grand Strategy for an Uncertain World: Renewing Transatlantic Partnership"
By:
General (ret.) Dr. Klaus Naumann, KBE
Former Chief of the Defence Staff Germany
Former Chairman Military Committee NATO.
General (ret.) John Shalikashvili
Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of
the United States of America
Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe.
Field Marshal The Lord Inge, KG, GCB, PC
Former Chief of the Defence Staff United Kingdom.
Admiral (ret.) Jacques Lanxade
Former Chief of the Defence Staff France
Former Ambassador
General (ret.) Henk van den Breemen
Former Chief of the Defence Staff the Netherlands.
Here is some analysis of that report done by Global Research:
The controversial NATO sponsored report entitled “Towards a Grand Strategy for an Uncertain World: Renewing Transatlantic Partnership". calls for a first strike use of nuclear weapons. The preemptive use of nukes would also be used to undermine an "increasingly brutal World" as well as a means to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction ...
The group, insists that the option of a nuclear first strike is indispensable, "since there is simply no realistic prospect of a nuclear-free world.".
The above are not penny-ante armchair generals. They are some of the highest ranking military officers to have served major Western powers. Yet, somehow, even they have begun to realize that successful preemption of Islamic terrorism may require the use of first strike nuclear attacks.
(continued).
If you have paid careful attention to my comments, then you should be very aware of how I feel such a horrific outcome could be avoided by the extra-judicial termination of Islam's jihadist elite.
It is those who cannot think sufficiently outside of the box that are obliged to consider more mundane applications of for using pre-existing weaponry.
The immensely salient observations of Robin Shadowes pertain quite significantly here, so I will excerpt them at length:
That is one of the things that worries me the most, losing our cultural and historocal heritage ... The priceless art in the Sistine Chapel alone is worth more than all of the art of MME. Then add the Louvre, Prado, Tate Gallery, British Museum, Guggenheim etc.
And that's just pictorial art. Then we have all the music produced over the centuries and all the literature. Having all this detroyed forever makes the ransacking of the Alexandrian library seem like nothing in comparison ... If all this is lost, there will be a new dark age and it might last a lot longer than the last one, perhaps for a millenia or more ...
Both the leftists and the muslims is intending to rewrite human history if they win, the former in a more marxist way and the latter in muslim way of course. Thus the discovery of America by muslims will eventually become truth, then dogma and then cut in stone forever.
Our homegrown islamist Mohammed Omar has his "theories" about the vikings actually being muslims. If they win, who is going to dispute him? No-one will dare to do that and it will form into dogma as well. All artifacts that supports a past with vikings as kufr will be destroyed.
Others here at Gates of Vienna have observed how even the Nazis did not seek to scrub out all European culture. In fact, much of it would have been preserved. While none of that lessens to vile nature of their crimes, it still stands in stark contrast to how, throughout Islam's history, Muslims have intentionally erased the historical record using whatever means possible.
This pattern persists today as the waqf in Jerusalem destroy priceless Jewish archaeological artifacts dug from beneath the al Aqsa Mosque in an attempt to eradicate all evidence of pre-existing Judaeic culture in that area.
One can only imagine the lengths Muslims would go to in an attempt to totally destroy the legacy of Judeo-Christian European history. Gutenberg Bibles and Old Master paintings would be heaped upon bonfires as the great cathedrals were torn down stone by stone or converted into mosques like the Hagia Sophia.
Such a prospect is something I will not tolerate, even at the cost of every Muslim life on earth. Islam started this global conflict. Let them stop it or suffer the consequences.
Zenster, of course the military folks are pondering strategies and tactics and gaming scenarios.
BTW, the most military folks are conservatives.
The re imposition of Western Imperialism may be a win/win for everybody except Islam and the Islamists.
But a policy of containment is the correct near course action. First it removes Islamic terrorism and shariah voters etc from the West. This will allow time for the intra-cultural war to be fought with the Western Left, as well as a low intensity war on the culture of Islam in Muslim countries.
I certainly agree that Islam is the one pushing conflict....and the choice is theirs as to whether they wish to survive it. Im just not trigger happy.
About destroying or distortion of history, let's also remember the recent incident where an iranian academic was caught cutting out pages from ancient books on the British Museum. This had been going on for years and years. Nobody knows how much that has been lost because of this mans sabotage more than the experts who says the books where all priceless!
This is a totaloutrage! Here we can clearly see that even the well-educated and seemingly secular muslims, can at any time be radicalized and are therefore nothing but ticking bombs. I can only assume that similar sabotage is happening all over the western hemisphere, in any college, university or museum who has been infiltrated by muslims. It could be very well on-going now as I write this. That they are destroying or stealing priceless books and artefacts. Already now might parts of our cultural history have been destroyed forever. Unless western-friendly parties like Wilder's PVV comes to power in every western nation, we might never learn the truth of this whole treason.
Now I will be a bit out on a limb here, you might think but what I'm about to tell is well worth to ponder about. What if this has already happened in the distant past? I mean total annihilation, holocaust or whatever you prefer to call it? What if there once existed ancient civilisations who at some point in time annihilated themselves? Is there any proof to dispute such facts? Depends on what you call facts and of how open-minded you actually are.
But remember this, the late brilliant scientist Dr Robert Oppenheimer was once caught quoting, and I'm sorry for not remember it word for word but he said something like, "this is the first nuclear blast", then paused and added... "in modern times!". Then he was said to have quoted some passages of the indian epic Bhagadvadghita. So obviously this very brilliant man himself believed that man once had this capacity long before our time.
So maybe civilisations like Atlantis and Lemuria actually existed in the far past long before the accepted 10000 years and where far more advanced than we think. After all, not even today with all are giant cranes, we cannot build anything like the pyramid of Cheops. Or take these hieroglyphs from Abydos which are strangely similar to modern-day aircrafts!
http://i.pbase.com/o6/97/570097/1/59414830.mMkW441B.20060405_MG_5614Custom.jpg
to be con't
Robin Shadowes,
I heard a theory like that a few years ago but never gave it much thought. However I think it's entirely plausible.
Nowadays we are not even able to recreate ancient Athenian triremes and their use only goes as far back as the beginning of our own civillisation.
On a related note here is a blog post about a painting of what appears to be the detonation of an atom bomb - painted by an Orthodox monk in 1603.
He apparently based his painting on passages from the Book of Revelation.
Or take another example, Baalbek in Lebanon. There are some enormous blocks of stone that baffles once mind. How could they have been cut and moved?
"Blocks 1 and 2 are two of the famous Trilithon - three enormous stones each 14 X 12 X 64 feet and weighing an estimated 800 tons (700,000 kg). Blocks 3 and 4 are two of a row of 300 ton giant stones that circles the ruins of the temple. The stones shown have been given an angle inwards on their top half. Neither the large stones or the smaller stones show much weathering, but look at block number 6 (above number 1) - this block appears to be highly weathered, or perhaps less finished, unlike any other in the picture."
http://ancientmystery.info/Baalbek.htm
Or the so called Bimini Road. Sceptics say it is a natural formation. You make up your own mind...
http://www.subversiveelement.com/BiminiRoad.html
There are similar structures outside Japan and the sceptics say natural as usual.
http://www.grahamhancock.com/gallery/underwater/default.htm
And then there's the strange tale of Admiral Richard Evelyn Byrd and his polar expeditions and his diary where he tells of his meetings with representatives of an ancient antedeluvian civilisation living inside the earth itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_E._Byrd
EscapeVelocity: BTW, the most military folks are conservatives.
And being "military folks", they would be among the first to wrest power from an unresponsive or surrendering president's hands in order to begin applying national security doctrine as it should be.
Lack of executive level response to even a single nuclear terrorist attack upon American soil would justify an instantaneous coup d'etat.
The re imposition of Western Imperialism may be a win/win for everybody except Islam and the Islamists.
You say that like it's a bad thing!
If there has to be something so repugnant as imperialism, let it be Western Imperialism.
But a policy of containment is the correct near course action. First it removes Islamic terrorism and shariah voters etc from the West. This will allow time for the intra-cultural war to be fought with the Western Left, as well as a low intensity war on the culture of Islam in Muslim countries.
Except that Israeli-style containment is not possible with a region the size of the MME (Muslim Middle East). You might be able to contain people, but not terrorism. Have you or haven't you read El Ingles' essays on this subject?
I certainly agree that Islam is the one pushing conflict....and the choice is theirs as to whether they wish to survive it. Im just not trigger happy.
I'm trigger happy only so far as it involves bringing Islam's jihadi elite to room temperature. However, I still refuse to rule out pre-emptive nuclear first strikes. As Islam escalates towards Total War, it is best to keep in mind just how well a few precision first-use nuclear strikes worked against Imperial Japan in WWII.
About Antarctica, curiously enough Google seems to have blurred a large area there. What are they hiding? Especially since airplanes are not allowed to fly over there or land.
http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2009/161/google-earth-trust.htm
Finally we have the controverisl book by Michael Cremo titled Forbidden Archelogy which samples all kinds of strange anomolies and artefacts found but ignored by science, just because it does not fit into their theories of the rise of civilisation or the development of homo sapiens or other species for that matter. Like the dogma that the man and dinosaur never existed together. According to many of the strange artefacts found deep in the geological strata disputes this fact though. Now, and this is indeed the most incredible. The age of these finds. Some are dated as several hundred thousand years old. Maybe you think that is old? It sure is compared to the sumerians. But it does not end there. Not by a long shot. Then there are finds that turns out to be millions of years old. And it does not stop even there. The oldest finds are about 500 million years old! That is so far out that it is hard to comprehend. Supposedly Atlantis went under 25-50000 years ago. All we have left is stories of Plato and not all of them are complete or have survived to our age. But at least they have a name. And all the myths and legends. But those who are hundreds of millions of years old, they have been totally lost in time. Maybe that is the fate that eventually awaits all civilisations. I would hate that to happen, that our civilisation becomes the stuff of legends and fairy tales. Just think of the end of the classic movie Planet of the Apes. Perhaps that is what will remain of our civilisation if we star nuking the crap out of each other. Remember the stakes here. Names like Rembrandt, Vermeer, Mozart and Bach will be completely lost as well as all their works. All that stuff that has defined our civilisation. In that perspective I rather see all muslims go, each and everyone of them if so must. Zenster is right. Our civilisation is so much more better than theirs. Thier civilisation is one of stagnation, backwardness and utter barbarism. The way the multicultis reason is pure insanity. All cultures are not equal. Cultural relativism is just plain wrong and needs to wind up on the historical dump.
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/2434/Forbidden_Archeology___Part_1_6/
Robin Shadowes: About destroying or distortion of history, let's also remember the recent incident where an Iranian academic was caught cutting out pages from ancient books [kept] in the British Museum. This had been going on for years and years. Nobody knows how much that has been lost because of this man's sabotage more than the experts who say the books were all priceless!.
Again, another superlative example of Islam's ongoing revisionism. Now, Imagine the scale this would escalate to were Muslims in control of Western society.
I can only assume that similar sabotage is happening all over the western hemisphere, in any college, university or museum who has been infiltrated by muslims. It could be very well on-going now as I write this.
Thank you, Robin Shadowes. I had not even considered the possibility of there being a concerted effort at vandalizing all available historic records, even though this is well within the boundaries of existing Islamic anti-Western doctrine. This single concept alone militates towards deportation and isolation, if only to preserve the legacy of Western civilization.
There's one thing I'm curious about and maybe our american friends can answer it. What if Obama comes out of the closet and reveal himself as a true muslim. How will people on street level react? Or even more important, how will Pentagon react and all the different so called letter agencies? Will there be rebellions within the agencies, the military and police? Or will they all be loyal to him even when he comes out as muslim? After all, if all this we see now is just taqyyia, then it means he does not give a hoot about most americans. They're all just kufr to him and thus destined to hell anyway. Gosh, I almost wish I'd never came to think aboút all this. It is pretty scary. Probably he won't push the button right away. I guess first comes the more or less obligatory dawah. How many would convert if he comes out? Would be interesting to hear your opinions of such a eerie scenario.
Zenster, I fully recognize the Wests ability to make sheets of glass a reality.
I dont think the reimposition of Western Imperialism is a bad thing. I think that instead of 3rd Worlders doing anything in their power to come to be under Western Rule in Western Lands, that maybe we should bring Western Rule to them. It will a win/win situation for everybody (but not for the Islamists).
The Western Left is THE problem.
They still practice and acknowledge the White Man's Burden, but in a self hating warped dystopian version. Reverse colonization isnt progressive.
Interestingly enough, reverse colonization is a feminine archtypical behavior pattern. Instead of force projection, you recieve the other and then try to manipulate them. This may be a macro effect of the womens vote in the West.
Post a Comment