Saturday, August 28, 2010

Seismic Shifts in Vienna, Part 2

Below is the conclusion to the report by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff on the uproar in Vienna over the upcoming municipal elections. The establishment parties and the media are striving to keep the “xenophobes” down, but the FPÖ is appealing directly to the public over the immigration issue — and succeeding.

The first part of this report may be read is here.


Strache billboard

Seismic Shifts in Vienna, Part 2
by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff


When I appeared at the ACT! for America Conference in Washington DC in late June, I warned America about the loss of freedom of speech that Austria has been facing. Not only that, but I compared the creeping loss of freedom during the rise of Hitler in the 1930s to that experienced nowadays. In addition, I spoke about the outright civil war among political parties, leading to the loss of classical discussion between those who are at the opposite ends of the political spectrum.

Civil war among political parties? Certainly in a verbal sense. There is a distinct lack of classical discourse nowadays. As Melanie Phillips brilliantly argues in her new book The World turned Upside Down, “Dissent is labeled as pathology — homophobia, xenophobia, Islamophobia — with phobia, or irrational fear, used as a synonym for prejudice. There are even outright accusations of insanity, a weapon used by totalitarian movements […]. Any fact that challenges the worldview of the left is ignored, denied or explained away, because to admit even a scintilla of such a truth would bring the entire utopian house of cards crashing down […]. Anyone who objects to the falsehoods of the left and points out the truth must be right-wing and thus “fascist”. In this way, truth itself is demonized — and the bigger the truth that is told, the more demonized the teller becomes.”

Another clever strategy employed by the opponents in this war-like state is the use of “death by silence”. As Dymphna has described so eloquently, death by silence — or Totschweigetaktik as it is called in the original German — in effect kills any dissenting opinion. The term

[does] not seem to have an equivalent in English (though we sorely need a neologism for this one since it’s such a prevalent maneuver in the MSM):

… “death by silence” is… “an astonishingly effective tactic for killing off creative work or fresh ideas or even news stories. You don’t criticise or engage with what’s being said or produced or expressed; instead you deprive someone and their work or opinion of the oxygen of attention’’.

Conservatives know totschweigetaktik all too well. It has become common to ask if a particularly egregious move by the progressives will make its way past the increasingly p.c. media threshold into the light of day. Often these stories die in the dark. The portal seems to shrink even as their tactics become more odiously obvious.

The opponents in this war — and yes, we must call this a war — are given ample opportunity to express their points of view and are never called to task by their critics because of death by silence. A German pop song, Lass die Leute reden, song describes just that:

Lass die Leute reden und hör ihnen nicht zu
Die meisten Leute haben ja nichts Besseres zu tun
Lass die Leute reden, bei Tag und auch bei Nacht
Lass die Leute reden — das haben die immer schon gemacht


Let the people talk and don’t listen to them,
Most of them have nothing better to do,
Let the people talk, during the day and during the night.
Let the people talk, that’s what they’ve always done.

Und wahrscheinlich ist ihnen das nicht mal peinlich
Es fehlt ihnen jede Einsicht
Und wieder mal zeigt sich: Sie sind kleinlich
Unvermeidlich fremdenfeindlich


They’re probably not even embarrassed,
And they have no deeper insight,
And once again it shows: They are narrow-minded,
And inevitably xenophobic

If death by silence does not yield the expected results, namely that the opposing point of view fades away, then ad hominem attacks follow.

Let us now apply all this to the current political situation in Austria, in particular in Vienna, where the political parties are fighting for votes and support in the upcoming municipal elections. As I have already reported in part one of this essay, the battlefields at the gates of Vienna are being drawn up and the armies are preparing to fight for and against their civilizations and way of life.

With Vienna still reeling from the effects of Heinz-Christian Strache’s campaign posters using the term “Vienna blood”, no one expected the next attack to emanate from the Muslim side. It was, however, even less expected to come to the aid of the “right-wing, Islamophobic” faction. Nonetheless, what Anas Shakfeh, the outgoing president of the Islamic Faith Community, had to say can rightly be called explosive (thanks to JLH for the translation).
- - - - - - - - -
Mosque Debate: Swiftly Ignited, Quickly De-Fused

by Anna-Maria Wallner

Die Presse

President of the Islamic religious community Shakfeh hopes for a recognizable mosque in every provincial capital in “two or three decades.” The FPÖ (Austrian Freedom Party) reacts predictably.

Heated debates arise so quickly in pre-election season. The president of the Islamic religious community in Austria (IGGiÖ), Anas Shakfeh that over a long period of time, there may be in each provincial capital an “outwardly recognizable mosque, including minaret.” And the political Right haul off for a (sadly predictable) verbal roundhouse blow.

Indeed. the timing of Shakfeh’s interview with the Austria Press Agency (APA) a few weeks before elections in Vienna on October 10th was not an especially clever choice. It was to be expected that the FPÖ — already energized by the debate about its “Wiener Blut” posters — would react to such a foray. FP general secretary, Harald Vilimsky already opines that mosques are “brooding nests of radical Islam” in a broadcast in which he, furthermore, demands a “ban on immigration by people from Islamic territory.” Gerald Grosz of the BZÖ (Coalition for Austria’s Future) is just as dainty: he considers Shakfeh’s suggestions to be idiotic and calls mosques “nests of resistance.”

Shakfeh rejects the reproach that he unleashed a timely debate before the Vienna elections that the FPÖ could make use of. He tells Die Presse that the conversation with APA was first and foremost occasioned by the approaching elections within his religious community (November, 2010 to June, 2011). It was also not least because he was asked about the current FPÖ campaign. Viennese SP representative Omar Al Rawl defends Shakfeh: “He did not intend to start a debate.”

Al Rawl says he is shaken by how “scurrilously these politicians can speak about houses of worship.”

IGGiÖ president Shakfeh is counting on his departure after the new elections in his religious community. He wants to dedicate what will presumably his last year in office to the fight against the clichés about the ca. 500,000 Muslims living in Austria. “Naturally not all Muslims are angels. We are normal people like all others,” he says. He is against the German language requirement before immigration and against the ban on burkas. He again suggest a separate governmental office for immigration and integration.

The reactions of the FPÖ and BZÖ did not surprise Shakfeh. “The election campaign they are conducting is not a clean one, and at the cost of Muslims and other immigrants, whom they see as the so-called aliens. No matter how integrated we are.”

Five Minarets in Austria

By “a mosque recognizable from the outside” Shakfeh means a building “that everyone perceives as a mosque.” There should be the basic architecture of a mosque: main building, minaret, dome. “Just as a church has a basic structure,” he says. “The way houses of prayer and mosques were in the 1960s and 70s — in cellar restaurants or apartments — should be over. We don’t want to hide.”

He is not concerned about how centrally a mosque is located: “It must just be accessible to the faithful. Besides, what is on the edge of a city today may be central in ten years.” Shakfeh hopes that sooner or later (but not tomorrow of the next day) there will be a mosque in each of Austria’s states. And Austria is not so far from that. Depending on how you count, there are four or five mosques with a minaret: in Vienna, Telfs (Tyrol), Saalfelden (Salzburg), Bad Vöslau (Lower Austria; this one has two minarets, so it could be counted twice) and the minaret built out of wood by children in Innsbruck as part of a Catholic initiative. In that light, Shakfeh’s push seems downright diffident.

Debates like this make us forget that a mosque can be built without citizen initiatives or hate campaigns from the political right, as Saalfelden proves. There has been a mosque there with an 8 meter high minaret. Until a year ago, not even the IGGiÖ knew about it.

Reactions from all sides of the political spectrum were foreseeable. Both FPÖ and BZÖ (Alliance for the Future of Austria) argued that “mosques are the breeding ground for radicalism” and “mosques are pockets of resistance of a democracy-hating, inhuman parallel society.” Mosques should only be built after a referendum. ÖVP predictably had nothing else to say but, “There is good timing and bad timing to start a discussion.” Christine Marek, ÖVP mayoral candidate, feared this Shakfeh’s interview “plays into the hands of the right-wingers.” The Green party was, apart from the usual tune — Nazi, xenophobe, blah… blah…. — silent. SPÖ handed the problem over to Vienna mayor Michael Häupl, who said he declines to add fuel to the fire. Since there is already a mosque with a minaret in Vienna, end of discussion. Really?

Strache, in turn, announced a referendum analogous to the Swiss referendum on minarets. He wants to ask the following questions:

1. Should there be a ban on minarets?
2. Should there be a ban on wearing headscarves in the public sphere as well as a total ban on wearing the burqa and niqab?
3. Should Muslims be forced to sign a declaration that the Austrian rule of law (constitution) supersedes Sharia?

According to the tabloid ÖSTERREICH, Strache is planning the referendum to start in Vienna because this is where the highest percentage of Muslims resides. He wants Vienna “to turn into New York”, where there a massive protests against the Ground Zero mosques. ÖSTERREICH adds, “There and here [in Austria] the protesters, predominantly young ones, are afraid of foreigners.”

Although it is hard to imagine, the two antagonists upped the ante. In a press conference, Strache called SPÖ Vienna “an Islamist party” because 36 of the candidates on the voting list have Muslim background. The mayor was furious. “Strache is stupid,” he says.

Vienna Social Democratic (SPÖ) Mayor Michael Häupl has once more caused controversy by calling his biggest political opponent a “stupid person”.

Asked what he thought of Freedom Party (FPÖ) boss Heinz-Christian Strache, Häupl said today (Friday) he would like to use a famous quote by late SPÖ Chancellor Bruno Kreisky: “He is a really stupid person.”

Häupl, mayor of the capital since 1994, irritated Strache supporters but also fellow SPÖ members earlier this year by branding the right-winger a “loser”. Some SPÖ decision-makers have expressed concerns such attacks will only give Strache an extra boost in his attempt to break the Vienna SPÖ’s absolute majority.

The FPÖ garnered 14.8 per cent in the 2005 Vienna election, and the latest polls show that it has chances to improve significantly in the 10 October vote.

The Social Democrats are expected to approach the People’s Party (ÖVP) for coalition talks if they lose their city parliamentary majority won five years ago (49.1 per cent).

But Häupl stressed today: “We are working hard to avoid being forced to think about possible coalition constellations.”

Analysts have pointed out that the SPÖ is in a difficult position since the past has shown that potential supporters of dominating parties tend to stay away from the voting booths over expectations of certain victory.

The SPÖ is tipped to point out Vienna’s high living quality standard — the city came out on top in various international studies — in its campaign.

Häupl has promised to focus on content and information instead of populist slogans that the FPÖ has focused on.

FPÖ strategists recently presented posters calling for “More Courage for our ‘Viennese Blood’ — Too much of the other doesn’t do any good for anyone.” (Mehr Mut für unser ‘Wiener Blut’ — Zu viel Fremdes tut niemandem gut).

The campaign poster series has been branded as “racist” by political opponents and NGOs — and prompted SPÖ members whose families originate from foreign countries to give blood.

Strache also infuriated left-wing politicians by speaking out against additional mosques in Vienna.

His announcement followed an appeal for more “visible” mosques with minarets by Anas Schakfeh, president of the Austrian Islamic Denomination (IGGiÖ).

Many members of the country’s Islamic community — there are around half a million Muslims in Austria — criticised Syrian-born Schakfeh amid fears of a worsening of the political and social climate in the country. Newspaper columnists meanwhile suggested the FPÖ’s Vienna department must be delighted about the statement as it could make many potential backers support the party in the October balloting.

Indeed, the political and social climate in Austria is deteriorating. Very fast. And that the leader of the pack, so to speak, is unable to calm down the situation, but adds even more fuel to a veritable bonfire, be cause for great concern.

Häupl demands an apology from Heinz-Christian Strache for calling his party an Islamist party. After all, he equated SPÖ with a criminal organization, since in common parlance “Islamist” means terrorist. Obviously, Strache cannot distinguish between Islam and Islamism. “If I were to call the FPÖ a Nazi party — which I will not — there would be a huge outcry.” SPÖ respects all religions; what it does not respect is terrorism, whether religious or not. “Mr. Strache, study history and then apologize.”

Even worse, Häupl warns of buildings on fire.

“Do we want a city in relatively high prosperity, where people live together in peace and harmony? Or do we want to live in a city where people are incited to hatred and where buildings are burning, where things are a mess?”

It is an extremely worrying scenario, but what Häupl completely misses here is that it is his policies that upset the “social peace”; that is his appeasement of Islam that has been dividing the population; that it is his total ignorance of the reality on the streets and in the parks that will be sanctioned by the voters.

And the voters are indeed upset. Here a comment in the newspaper Die Presse:

About three hours ago, I was in Schwechat [a town near the Vienna airport] where in the main square I saw preparations for a festival. I asked a woman passing by what was going to be celebrated since there are so many Turkish tents to be seen. The woman immediately (!) broke down in tears, saying that she can no longer stand all those immigrants who — even if they have been in Austria for a mere five years — are hauled by the SPÖ into the city council and who represent only their own interests. She will vote FPÖ in the coming elections.

Yes, there are seismic shifts coming. The fault lines are shifting, one by one, both in the United States and in Europe, and the rocks of lies and deceit are falling and soon they will crush the tower of multiculturalism, political correctness, and self-loathing so carefully erected by the political left and its cronies.

28 comments:

Kairos said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Baron Bodissey said...

Kairos --

Gates of Vienna's rules about comments require that they be civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum. Your comment violated the last of these rules. We keep a PG-13 blog, and exclude foul language, explicit descriptions, and epithets. This is why I deleted your comment.

Use of asterisks is an appropriate alternative.

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

Kairos said...

Here in Germany it is Thilo Sarrazins new book "Deutschland schafft sich ab" (germany is abolishing itself) who tries to make a "seismic shift" in the debate about muslim immigrants.

He says what we all know: That they are dumb, do not want to fit in here, segregate, that they are violent and their religion is s***.

And he did his math and can proove his propositions by numbers.

So what does happen? Every single prominent politician adresses Sarrazin as a "Nazi" or worse. They just do not want to hear it.

It is time for a political change in Germany as well as in many other European countries. But our vicechancellor just is concerned about that we accept the souveignity of Kosovo (!!!)

In polls to 80-90% of people are pro-Sarrazin.

I believe our "elites" just wet their pants thinking about tomorrow.

Kairos said...

Baron B:

I apologize.

It is real hard for me to comment current events "sine ira et studio."

While the ones who propagate hate and murder are appeased and our **** gouverment **** in the eyes of evil, the people who have the courage to say the truth are claimed ****.

This is why my temper sometimes just breakes the rational chains.

Again, I am sorry.

EscapeVelocity said...

There is an underground paradigm shift underway.

The Leftist media is aghast that they no longer have control of the information flow...controlling thought.

Keep on Speaking Truth to Power.

Dymphna said...

@Kairos--

Thank you for the asterisks...that's a good beginning. We have said this so often that we should put it in the directions for posting: kids read this blog AND the comments.

Sometimes when we remind people of this, they express surprise or disbelief. In fact, parents who homeschool their kids have come on the comment threads to support this assertion and to explain why their kids come over here:

They send them here because this is one of the few places their children can read about current events, both in this country and, oh, especially what is happening in Europe.

As you must be aware, there is little information available to our young about the European countries on which their own culture was built. In sad fact, our kids in government schools are no longer being taught their own history. New history books are now beginning with the middle of the 18th century because "that early stuff takes too long"...

I'm not trying to lecture you, sir. I ask you to find, as Lincoln called it, "the better angels of [y]our nature" and give these kids your best words when you address this peril we are facing.

We must give our children hope that there are people, REAL ADULTS, looking for a way out of the current mess, that the future -- their future -- will unfold as it should, in some semblance of order and liberty.

So I offer this amendment to your comment:

While the ones who propagate hate and murder are appeased and our duplicitous government smiles (with) the eyes of evil, the people who have the courage to say the truth are claimed to be traitors.

Obviously, you can add your own words. A man who uses "kairos" as his nic understands the power of a timely response in the face of evil...

/sermon

Jewish Odysseus said...

Ironically, a communist German expat may have had the best label for "death by silence." Herbert Marcuse, in a preposterously wrong-headed analysis, said the western democracies are guilty of "repressive toleration" for dealing with their working classes by flexible reforms and benefits that actually ameliorated their problems...thus denying those genuinely enslaved masses of the proper revolutionary consciousness! Had the capitalist overlords simply sent in goons or tanks to deal with labor grievances, that wd have actually been BETTER for the broad masses, since they'd then be energized to wipe out their persecutors, and usher in the revo. Or, as Lenin said, "Tant pire, tant mieux."

Cometathinkofit, I guess Saul Alinsky and Cloward-Piven followed that "repressive toleration" theme, too. But they moved it along, by saying that the working classes cd foil that strategy simply by making unmeetable, cascading demands, and ultimately crashing the system as it tried to meet them.

Dymphna said...

Escape Velocity said:

There is an underground paradigm shift underway.

And the momentum of that shift is growing faster than we can grasp. No one controls it which is why those in power are scared.

*********************

The Leftist media is aghast that they no longer have control of the information flow...controlling thought.

It's even worse than that. Not only do they no longer have control, but they've blown a hole in the headgasket and the MSM is going to find increasingly that their taunts are turned against them.

Perhaps the best recent examples of this phenomenon can be found in their over-use of certain words, e.g., racist and Islamophobe.

They believed Goebbels, that if you repeat lies long enough, people would believe them. All too often, the tactic worked. But everything wears out eventually. Now they must beat the drum harder to drown out the noise of reality.

Must be a scary position.

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

Keep on Speaking Truth to Power.

Heck, Power never listens. The only thing Power understands is winning and losing. If we turned our backs on the elites, the silence would deafen them.

But in that pardigm shift, it might happen...when the houses of cards they've built begin to tumble, lots more things are up for grabs.

Zenster said...

… the battlefields at the gates of Vienna are being drawn up and the armies are preparing to fight for and against their civilizations and way of life.

It's no small coincidence that this conflict has been resurrected at such a familiar old battleground. Proximity, both geographic and ideological, has contributed to this as Socialism and Islam are both forms of Big Government. Their kinship is just as incestuous as a Muslim marriage.

Per Anna-Maria Wallner: Indeed, the timing of Shakfeh’s interview with the Austria Press Agency (APA) a few weeks before elections in Vienna on October 10th was not an especially clever choice.

This is merely Shakfeh doing what Muslims do best and that is extinguishing a fire with gasoline.

Viennese SP representative Omar Al Rawl defends Shakfeh: “He did not intend to start a debate.”

Al Rawl says he is shaken by how “scurrilously these politicians can speak about houses of worship.”


Here, Al Rawl lets slip a crown jewel of Islamic taqiyya. In America, the Ground Zero mosque has finally ignited a dawning awareness of how dissimilar Islamic mosques are to nearly all other genuine houses of worship.

1. Should there be a ban on minarets?

2. Should there be a ban on wearing headscarves in the public sphere as well as a total ban on wearing the burqa and niqab?

3. Should Muslims be forced to sign a declaration that the Austrian rule of law (constitution) supersedes Sharia?


Unfortunately, Conservative elements are so paralysed by Political Correctness that even their attempts to take definite action all too often comes in the form of band-aid solutions, too.

The above measures do help to create an Islam "unfriendly" atmosphere but all of them are mere window dressing with respect to combating root causes of Muslim colonization.

Only a complete halt to all immigration from Muslim-majority countries can have any hope of scaling back Islamic jihad in the West.

Many members of the country’s Islamic community — there are around half a million Muslims in Austria — criticised Syrian-born Shakfeh amid fears of a worsening of the political and social climate in the country.

Yet few people, if any, within Austria’s Muslim community go out of their way to denounce and expose Islamist scheming. Shakfeh's congenital overreach and the Muslim community's typically deafening silence are the hallmarks of jihadist Islam and are primary modes of behavior that continue to tip off Westerners, most of whom remain proverbial “frogs in the pot”.

Obviously, Strache cannot distinguish between Islam and Islamism.

Nor can many well-schooled Western authorities on Islam. Neither do a majority of Islamic leaders make any such distinction either. This also applies whenever futile efforts are made to have these same leaders distinguish between Islam and terrorism. It is solely the West’s Liberals who seem most able to draw a distinction where mountains of physical evidence indicate there is none to be found.

“Do we want a city in relatively high prosperity, where people live together in peace and harmony? Or do we want to live in a city where people are incited to hatred and where buildings are burning, where things are a mess?”

Knowingly or not, Häupl commits the usual Liberal blunder of infantilizing Islam by legitimizing its pronounced tendency to resolve all conflicts via violence. Jihadists like Anjem Choudary and British Lord Ahmed routinely raise the veiled threat of Muslim violence whenever lawfare or their large stock of useful idiots cannot rise to the task.

Much like Holland's recent elections, indigenous Austrians now face a golden opportunity to make voter displeasure known regarding their government's suicidal fascination with unchecked Muslim immigration. A very few election cycles will remain available for this to happen as a convergence of governmental oppression and demographic replacement will combine to eliminate all further chances.

EscapeVelocity said...

Please get these Thomas Jefferson quotes in circulation...these are particularly relevant to the GZM debate that is wide open at this point.


"Every society has a right to fix the fundamental principles of its association, and to say to all individuals, that if they contemplate pursuits beyond the limits of these principles and
involving dangers which the society chooses to avoid, they must go somewhere else for their exercise; that we want no citizens, and still less ephemeral and pseudo-citizens, on such terms. We may exclude them from our territory, as we do persons infected with disease." --Thomas Jefferson to William H. Crawford, 1816.

"A strict observation of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws
of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property, and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means." --Thomas Jefferson to John Colvin, 1810.

EscapeVelocity said...

Little known fact...

There were 3 mosques in the US in 1960, now there are over 2000.

Natalie said...

I was recently in Vienna and I think I saw some of Strache's campaign posters. Unfortunately, I don't believe I got a photo of any of them. (I do have an excuse: I had been awake for over 24 hours at that point, so I wasn't really thinking clearly.)

When I was in Vienna, one thing did strike me: there were quite a few Muslims there. I hadn't been expecting that. I know, I know, I've been reading about the Islamization of Europe for almost three years now, but as the saying goes, seeing is believing. It's not that I did not believe what I read; I just could not properly imagine it.

Zenster said...

Due to Blogger's wonky state of operation, the first part of my post did not stick, despite having checked it in all three windows. Here it is:

Anyone who objects to the falsehoods of the left and points out the truth must be right-wing and thus “fascist”. In this way, truth itself is demonized — and the bigger the truth that is told, the more demonized the teller becomes.”

As Elisabeth is so fond of noting in her emails:

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

− George Orwell −


Europe is rapidly taking this one very dangerous step further by criminalizing Free Speech and thereby outlawing the truth. Few things ca

As Pat Condell notes about the trial of Geert Wilders:

Video Time Point 00:54 − … because according to the prosecution, it doesn't even matter what he [Wilders] says is true, what matters is that it's illegal.

Well, when the truth is against the law, then there's something seriously wrong with the law. Because when the truth is no defense, there is no defense and the law has no anchor so it will drift wherever the wind of political expediences blows.


When rule of law no longer inspires respect, that is an open invitation for more than just Orwell's type revolutionary acts.

… “death by silence” is… “an astonishingly effective tactic for killing off creative work or fresh ideas or even news stories.

Thus, as Condell puts it:

"… justice will be made to fight for its life, starved of the oxygen of truth that gives it life."

This Totschweigetaktik or "death by silence" is doubly effective when backed by lawful authority, no matter how well-intentioned or, in this case, maliciously put in the employ of delusional pro-immigration Socialists.

The opponents in this war — and yes, we must call this a war — are given ample opportunity to express their points of view and are never called to task by their critics because of death by silence.

This suppression of truth can only go on for so long before it hits the brick wall of reality. America had its own defining moment of truth when a putative ally, Saudia Arabia, provided fifteen of the nineteen hijackers that perpetrated the 9-11 atrocity.

If death by silence does not yield the expected results, namely that the opposing point of view fades away, then ad hominem attacks follow.

This is merely the time honored tradition of killing the messenger. It is band-aid medicine that treats symptoms and not the disease itself. Reactive in nature, it is quite telling that the Liberal Left has now become reactionary. This is in keeping with how its "Anti-Fascist" Antifa squads epitomize fascism in action.

With truth temporarily evicted from the(ir) premises, these Islamophiles are reduced to clutching at the straws of a fantasy-based narrative. This goes on, even while Europe burns down around their ears as Muslim no-go-zones explode into violence with almost humdrum regularity.

Zenster said...

Due to Blogger's wonky state of operation, the first part of my post did not stick, despite having checked it in all three windows. Here it is:

Anyone who objects to the falsehoods of the left and points out the truth must be right-wing and thus “fascist”. In this way, truth itself is demonized — and the bigger the truth that is told, the more demonized the teller becomes.”

As Elisabeth is so fond of noting in her emails:

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

− George Orwell −


Europe is rapidly taking this one very dangerous step further by criminalizing Free Speech and thereby outlawing the truth. Few things ca

As Pat Condell notes about the trial of Geert Wilders:

Video Time Point 00:54 − … because according to the prosecution, it doesn't even matter what he [Wilders] says is true, what matters is that it's illegal.

Well, when the truth is against the law, then there's something seriously wrong with the law. Because when the truth is no defense, there is no defense and the law has no anchor so it will drift wherever the wind of political expediences blows.


When rule of law no longer inspires respect, that is an open invitation for more than just Orwell's type revolutionary acts.

… “death by silence” is… “an astonishingly effective tactic for killing off creative work or fresh ideas or even news stories.

Thus, as Condell puts it:

"… justice will be made to fight for its life, starved of the oxygen of truth that gives it life."

This Totschweigetaktik or "death by silence" is doubly effective when backed by lawful authority, no matter how well-intentioned or, in this case, maliciously put in the employ of delusional pro-immigration Socialists.

The opponents in this war — and yes, we must call this a war — are given ample opportunity to express their points of view and are never called to task by their critics because of death by silence.

This suppression of truth can only go on for so long before it hits the brick wall of reality. America had its own defining moment of truth when a putative ally, Saudia Arabia, provided fifteen of the nineteen hijackers that perpetrated the 9-11 atrocity.

If death by silence does not yield the expected results, namely that the opposing point of view fades away, then ad hominem attacks follow.

This is merely the time honored tradition of killing the messenger. It is band-aid medicine that treats symptoms and not the disease itself. Reactive in nature, it is quite telling that the Liberal Left has now become reactionary. This is in keeping with how its "Anti-Fascist" Antifa squads epitomize fascism in action.

With truth temporarily evicted from the(ir) premises, these Islamophiles are reduced to clutching at the straws of a fantasy-based narrative. This goes on, even while Europe burns down around their ears as Muslim no-go-zones explode into violence with almost humdrum regularity.

yokel said...

Escape Velocity wrote: "The Leftist media is aghast that they no longer have control of the information flow...controlling thought."

We have a short term advantage in a relatively uncensored internet. And that is the only technology in widespread use that permits this dissemination of fact to counter the "Lies of the Left" (tm). So what are the Left up to?

1. The Great Australian Firewall. The leak of the hit-list during the technology trial showed that they were getting at a lot more than just pornographic images of children, which was the announced aim. I need hardly remark on the Great Firewall of China.
2. Ever increasing recording of what you say and read on the Internet. All done of course in the name of counter terrorism, but very effective in getting the large majority to self censor not only what they post but what they read. The moment the UN manages to impose a worldwide ban on the criticism of Islam through some form of treaty obligation that over-rides national laws, then all the internet surveillance records can be re-interrogated to see who visits such "reactionary" sites as GoV. Expect a knock on the door at some uncivilised hour.
3. Increasing subliminal pressure not to use encryption, because that is what paedophiles and terrorists and illegal file sharers use. And you wouldn't want to be suspected of being one of them, would you?

As Zenster notes above, there are increasing moves to criminalise free speech (aka dissent). We must be looking now for alternative methods and technologies, for we will be silenced on the Internet as it exists today. Sadly we must also be building trusted groups (aka the cells used by Communist spies), for disinformation is already flowing, and will get much worse.

[Sorry to those not in the know, aka = also known as.]

imnokuffar said...

An interesting comment.

"They British really do not like change or being told what to do. It goes against the grain of their nature"

If the British do not like being told what to do why have we had the most revolutionary change in society ever over the last 50 years ? The whole point is that the British have been told what to do, what to think, how to act, how to accept "the other" and all this has come about because of certain key changes in social policy and politics that have been enacted in the interests of so-called fairness. These policies are so eminently "reasonable" that to question them is heresy. We all know what these policies or rather dictats are called: Political Correctness and Multiculturalism. These policies are underlined by terror and fear, the fear of not being "fair minded", the terror of excommunication from the society of which you are (nominally) a part. This is brilliantly explained below.

Here is a quote from Oriana Fallacis' book "The Force of Reason". I recommend that all Nationalists read this book.

"In dictatorial or absolutist regimes, Toqueville explains despotism strikes the body. Grossly and murderously. That is, putting it in chainsthen torturing or suppressing it in various ways. Beheadings, hangings, shootings, stoning, Inquisitions, stakes etc. In doing so it ignores the soul which can rise intact over the mangled flesh and transform the victim into a hero.

In inanimate democracies (I call them weak and devitalised democracies° in the inertly democratic regimes despotism ignores the body and attacks the soul. Because it is the soul that it wants to put in chains, to torture to suppress. In fact its victims are never told as in absolutist regimes "Either you think as I do, or you die" They are told: "You choose. You're free not to think or to think as I do. And if you think differently to me, I shall not punish you with my auto-da-fe. I shall not touch your body, I shall not confiscate your assets. I shall not violate your political rights. You will even be permitted to vote. But you will never be able to be voted, elected. Nor followed nor respected. Because using my laws on freedom of opinion I shall say you are impure. A wretch, a lunatic, a liar, a dissolute, a sinner. And I shall condemn you to civil death. I shall make you a criminal, a culprit, an outlaw and people will not listen to you any longer. More than that: not to be punished in thier turn, those who think like you will abandon you. Then he adds that in inanimate democracies, in inertly democratic regimes, everything can be stated except the truth. Everything can be expressed, everything can be spread, except the truth. Because the truth leaves no way out and inspires fear. Draw an insuperable line around the freedom which reveals the truth......If the impure one crosses that line, if he or she jumps that barrier, punishment descends in him or her at the speed of light...... They trifle, they keep the foot in both camps. But soon fall silent and, terrified by the risk such ambiguity exposes to, they sneak away. They abandon the criminal, the culprit the outlaw to his or her fate."

Kairos said...

Dymphna,

I was not aware of the problem you explained. Thank you.

To the handling of words, it is just one side of the coin that I am very angry about what is happening in my home country (and every other European country) today. The other side is the difficulty to express yourself correcty in another language than your own, especially when you just leave a comment.

I am not feeling "lectured" this is your blog and it is your right to demand a certain quality in the comments. So I will try to make my point in better words.

What I am trying to say is that the veil of "democracy" hanging around our gouverments is starting to fall. More and more people recognize that parts of our system become more and more tyrannic. But your word "traitor" is not enough. When you critizie multi- culturalism, mass immigration and islamic mosque- buliding in Germany, when you say that you want your children to live in a German country, not in a muslim country (as Sarrazin did), you are claimed to be a "Nazi" and a "Racist." that is - in view of our history - the most stigmatizing and social isolating name- calling a German can do. And they use it every day to destroy peoples lives. And there are very many people who have a bad gut feeling about this but very few who see through the fog of lies. Most of us are so obsessed with our history that, no matter what, the accusation to be a "Nazi" is enough to lead people to hate you so much that they want you dead.

On the other hand every little demandement of muslims, even if it is stupid or against the law, seems to be number one priority for our authorities.

This is why I am so angry.

Greetings from Germany

Old Atlantic Lighthouse said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dymphna said...

This post is not about race. I

t's about poltiical ideologies that are inimical to Western culture.

I stand with anyone who is willing to go to bat for the basic ideals of the West.

Nor do I want my country deprived of what other cultures have to offer. I simply want the dominant Judaeo-Christian fundamentals to stay in place, no matter how attenuated the Left has made them.

Dymphna said...

Kairos--

I don't know if you're aware that there is a an international Christian service organization which shares your nic.

I guess that's what comes of having a religion that spread via Hellenic Greeks.

Anyway, these people in Kairos do work in medium and maximum security prisons on several continents.

They've been around long enough that the core group is beginning to die off. However, the group continues to grow, offering their program to long-term prisoners and their families.

See their site here:

Kairos Prison Ministry

Their strategy on entering a prison is intriguing. They don't look for the pious chaplain's assistant. Instead, they find out who the most influential leaders are. Doesn't matter how Big & Bad those men and women are, just that they're perceived by other inmates as leaders.

They're invited to this weekend of fellowship, which includes real food and all the cookies they can carry. Simple, but it works.

This began at Starke Prison in Florida. That's where Florida's death row is maintained. Since then it has spread through (?most?) of the US.

Here is a list of the foreign countries which have a program up and running:

Australia, Canada, Costa Rica,
Honduras, Nicaragua, Peru, South Africa, and the United Kingdom.

NorseAlchemist said...

Dymphna, the Kairos strategy mimics the original strategy of the Christians, which was to convert the leaders who would have the power to enforce conversion on those under them. I'm not surprised its working in prison.

The problem Liberals don't seem to realize is that when one shoves things in the dark, they keep growing. By denying "fascists" and "Nazis" their place in the light, they are making it far more likely that those things will actually appear.

Kairos said...

Dhymnphna:

Thank you, I was not aware of the existence of a "Kairos prison ministry."

As you will know Kairos is a (not well known) God among the old Greek Pantheon. I choose the nick to make the point that we have a limited phase of time to act. If we act too fast or too roughly it will be too soon and everything will fail. If we act too slow it will just be too late to change things.

So Kairos is the right moment of time to act.

Dymphna said...

Kairos--

I've written about that before, the concept of timeliness that isn't available in English...and certainly goes against the American grain.

Speaking of words: try using the Google translator when you want to expand your English vocabulary -- especially for words of high emotion. All the different ways to say "angry"

NorseAlchemist said...

Said best by Bruce Lee:

"I do not hit, it hits all by itself."

Dymphna said...

@ Norse A--

the original strategy of the Christians, which was to convert the leaders who would have the power to enforce conversion on those under them...

That's not how it works in prison vis-a-vis religion.

I'm sure you understand the process of inner conversion. These guys are leaders, not despots. Other prisoners can avoid them if they wish.

A few things about Kairos:

The people who go thru it are less likely to end up back in prison. Much lower recividism rate.

Kairos reunites them with their families outside. Kids who've never visited their father start showing up. Mothers and fathers begin contact with their sons and daughters.

While in prison, inmates who belong to Kairos seldom (if ever) participate in the endemic violence.

Their example is so compelling that others ask how they can join.

It's not forced conversion. I've been on those weekends and it's not like that at all.

It would take too long to give the history. However, as a lay movement before it ever became a prison ministry, the origins began with two men in Spain who'd been condemned to die. They asked for a priest and with him they planned how to face the unthinkable. From there, after their deaths, the priest began to use what he'd learned from those two men to encourage other men to live as those two had in their final weeks.

That was, oh, maybe 75 years ago, more or less. After being a lay movement within catholicism it was brought over to the US by returning servicemen. To make a long story short, the prison ministry eventually formed from there.

So it began in prison, moved out into the world, and then the world returned it to prisoners...

...I can't participate any more. Don't have the stamina. But we live near a max security prison and the next time Kairos has a weekend, I'm at least going to bake cookies. That much I *can* do.

BTW, this is very labor intensive. For every prisoner served there are a dozen people participating in some way or other for each weekend. And there is on-going followup.

Kairos said...

angry, berserk, aboil, enraged, furious, irate, mad, raging

(me, expressing my emotions concerning German politics)

;)

Dymphna said...

Kairos--

We love words around here! You've come to the right place.

Here are some American slang for anger (with a few Southern and Black expressions thrown in):

aggravated

"Socialists are the most aggravatin' people I ever did hear."
-------------------
blow your cool

"he made me so mad I totally blew my cool"

-----------------
cheesed off

At the Town Hall meeting, that politician cheesed off everyone there.

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

jammed

"Everytime Momma listens to a liberal she gets so jammed she has steam comin' out her ears."
-----------------

cut

"What are you so cut about?"

(but "cut up" means sad, grieving)
------------------

hot

"That debate made me hot, man. What a bunch of dummies!"

(hot can also refer to someone who is sexy. You'll often hear men say that Sarah Palin is "hot" or "a hottie". Women use in also in regard to men.)
-----------------------
burned up

"The way our team played burned me up. They always lose."

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

frosted

"When Dad heard about my accident with the car, was he ever frosted!"
--------------------

bent out of shape

"Don't get so bent out of shape, Dad. It was only a small dent."
------------------

vexed

"That boy vexes me something awful."

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

spitting nails

"She was so mad about what Aunt Tillie said that she was spittin' nails."

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

steamed

"He lies to everyone. People are starting to get steamed."

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

blow your fuse

"When that policeman stopped me for going five miles over the speed limit, I blew my fuse."

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

torqued

"I've never seen so many people torqued about (or torqued over, torqued up about) politics."

If this comment thread is still active, people will give you lots of others...

gsw said...

“Naturally not all Muslims are angels. We are normal people like all others,” he says. He is against the German language requirement before immigration and against the ban on burkas.

Anyone wanting to live in Austria should be willing to learn to speak the language.
For tourists, English is fine - everyone speaks English. For people wishing to become Austrian, there is time to learn the language.

But people arriving in Austria who wish to hide their faces and refuse to speak German - obviously are not interesting in integrating or working.
Thus, they are not welcome in the country.
This is not racism (Nazi-ism) - it is resistance, as in Parasites Not Welcome.

Dymphna said...

gsw--

Muslims have made it plain that their goal is NOT integration. Instead, they aim for accomodation. IOW, citizens will make accomodations for them and their rules, dietary, prayer times, etc.

But this is a one way street. There is no accomodation for others since others are wrong and are going to hell, the sooner the better.

One has only to look at the accomodations the Jews made to Mohammed to realize where that leads: you in a pit and your wife in Mohammed's cocubine.

Integration might have had a chance had immigration occurred in small, assimilable numbers. Or if some European countries had been more eager for that in the beginning. But Germany, as I recall, did not allow a citizenship process for the cheap labor they brought in...and now, here we are.