Monday, December 05, 2011

Are We Breivik’s Fellow Travellers?

The following smear job directed at Gates of Vienna appeared last Saturday in the Dutch newspaper Trouw. Our Dutch correspondent H. Numan has kindly translated it, and includes the following background information on the newspaper that carried it:

This name ‘Trouw’ means ‘Loyalty’. It started as a resistance newspaper in WW2, and after the war it continued as a major newspaper. The paper used to be left-wing/Protestant. It is the smallest of the national newspapers.

In the eighties and beyond this paper radicalized, and is now the most vocal voice for politically-correct media. Several times it crossed the boundaries of what a newspaper can do and remain unbiased.

For example, in 2008 Doekle Terpstra placed a (near) full page appeal for tolerance on the front page, free of charge. No newspaper places even a half-page advertisement on the front page. The editor fully approved of Mr. Terpstra’s actions, and gave him the full front page, free of charge.

This action was highly criticized when it happened. Not only that, it fell flat on its foolish face. Mr. Terpstra was — and still is — a prominent member of the CDA, but he had to leave politics, only to find himself currently in a massive scandal of bribery and incompetence.

Many people in The Netherlands no longer see Trouw as a reliable newspaper when it comes to unbiased reporting about ethnic problems.

The paper can even be seen as the modern version of Volk en Vaderland, the NSB newspaper of WW2. It is that biased.

Trouw, like Pajamas Media before it, was alarmed by the essay “Surrender, Genocide… or What?” by El Inglés, which appeared here in the spring of 2008. Before you read the hit piece below, read El Inglés’ original essay. You’ll notice that Trouw takes El Inglés’ arguments and distorts them, extends them, and wraps them around the most extreme interpretation — which is the conclusion the newspaper encourages the reader to reach.

Once again, many thanks to H. Numan for the translation:

Awaiting a new Breivik

Anders Breivik is deranged, concluded his psychiatrists. His manifesto should not be taken seriously. But a bit of surfing makes clear the Norwegian isn’t alone. “We have to make a choice: total capitulation to Islam, or genocide.” The book can be closed, so it seems. The Norwegian mass murderer acted according to his psychotic derangement, stated his psychiatrists. So he can be placed in the same category as the deranged killer in Alphen aan de Rijn; we don’t have to occupy ourselves with his ideas.

If only that were true. A bit of surfing on the Internet shows he doesn’t stand alone at all. At www.gatesofvienna.blogspot.com, for example, you can find from 2008 a lengthy essay from a certain ‘Inglés’ who claims genocide against Muslims is unavoidable. Inglés is not a visitor who wrote a few wild lines in anger. He is a welcome guest on this blogspot and posted several other very lengthy essays.

Gates of Vienna is not just a blogspot, but one with some prestige amongst Islamophobes. The name mentions to the gates of Vienna and refers to the siege of that city by the Ottoman Turks in 1683. Breivik titled his manifesto 2083. By that year, 400 years after the siege of Vienna, his revolution against multiculturalism should be finished.

Gates of Vienna doesn’t accept just anyone’s writings. It claims to moderate its posts seriously. Against this we can state that once something is published, it will remain there for years to come, such as the story of Inglés. It didn’t slip through by accident.

Inglés finds himself in well-known company, for the blogger Fjordman, quoted heavily in the works of Breivik, also publishes a lot here. Breivik didn’t include Inglés’ essays in his works; they would have fitted in nicely.

Reading Breivik, Fjordman or Inglés leaves a crushing impression. It shows how deeply the divide between the established media and anti-Islamic websites already is. Each accuses the other of unrealistic world views, and each has a different view of reality that hardly can be breached. The details of the report by Breivik’s psychiatrists are not known to the general public. However, if these doctors didn’t examine Islamophobic thinking, it’s understandable why they concluded Breivik is deranged.

Inglés is the nom de plume of a British national; he describes the situation in his country, though he also extrapolates to other countries as well, amongst them The Netherlands. He describes abuses in London, where according to him the police have the tendency to look the other way when radical Islam is involved, where vigilance would be more appropriate. He concludes the police are only fighting rearguard actions and have already handed the streets over to radical Islamic preachers.

According to Inglés the traditional elite will not confront the Islamic peril. That elite, he claims, caused the problems in the first place by a far too liberal immigration policy, and are blind to the ‘true character’ of Islam, which isn’t a religion, but a totalitarian political movement. They (the elite) are responsible for the sowing of this ‘cancer’ which Islam really is, according to Inglés. That elite is beginning to realize the problems, but will never admit their own failure. They placed the Islamic noose around our heads and will not do anything to take that noose away.

He named his article ‘Surrender, Genocide… or What?’. We have to make a choice: either total surrender to Islam, or resistance against it. In case of the latter, there are three options: to bully the Muslims away with nasty, irritating and humiliating measures, deportation or genocide.

It is already too late for bullying, there are too many Muslims for that to work. There remains deportation, which Inglés separates into organized deportation and ethnic cleansing. That is not possible in Europe, states Inglés. When France for example would extradite their Muslim population across the border with Spain, Spain would respond likewise by sending their Muslims to France.

However, an orderly deportation has its own problems. It won’t be easy to extradite 20 million Muslims by air. Who guarantees their native countries will allow them to return?

That means genocide is the only remaining option. That cannot, according to Inglés, be in the shape of the Holocaust. The Germans could hide for a long time what they were doing in the extermination camps. This is no longer possible with modern communication. Inglés fears it might take the shape of what happened on the Balkan in the 90’s. The violence will be extreme, he fears.

One reason is that Europeans are no longer used to war and force of arms, in contrast to the more tribal Muslims. Europeans will catch up quickly, but once they have, they will tend to overreact. Because they are not mentally trained to respond to violence in appropriate measure.

Genocide, in the shape of a wild massacre not far away in an extermination camp, but right in front of everybody’s eyes. Perhaps, rather than a Balkan scenario, a European Rwanda. Though Inglés does not make that comparison.

Does Inglés wants this to happen? No, he is quite firm in this. If he were in control for just a second, he could avoid the disaster taking shape. The measures he proposes are pretty drastic to say the least. All immigration from Muslim countries must be strictly forbidden. Every Muslim who argues for full or partial shariah law will be extradited immediately. Building of new mosques must be strictly forbidden. Unlicensed or illegal mosques will be torn down. Promoting or defending of whichever form of violent Islam will be punished with immediate deportation. Islam will earn the status of ‘perverted political ideology’, and practising Islam will earn a deportation sentence, also for children of migrants. British converts who openly profess their religion will be incarcerated.

However, writes Inglés, it is unthinkable that the present rules will allow this kind of measures. That is why the last option, genocide, will remain. At least, if we refuse to submit to the Muslims. An act of terror could begin the bloodbath, he makes clear in another ‘essay’, about a fictive civil war in Denmark.

Inglés presents his story as an analysis, but you can easily read it as a veiled call for violence. Since a war with Muslims is inevitable anyway, is the logical conclusion, you had better be prepared for it. Buy arms, train yourself in using them. The blogger Fjordman pleads for this.

No printed newspaper would allow these kinds of stories on the opinion page. But in the world of the Islamophobic Internet, Inglés is just one out of many. The same goes for the larger parts of Breivik’s manifesto. The conclusion of his psychiatrists doesn’t change anything.

48 comments:

medge said...

"But in the world of the Islamophobic Internet"..And why is the "world of the internet" !sLamOphObIc?
pray tell..Hmmm? What a dumb rag..and the stench of it is detectable right across the Atlantic..

Adam Zur said...

In general it is a good thing to get insulted. I know it does hurt, but still Rebbi Nachman said that to hear oneself being insulted and to be silent is the main way of repentance.

Anonymous said...

An illuminating editorial by Trouw and a classic demonstration of the Dhimmi mind-set at work.

It is also worth noting the predominantly ad hominem approach taken by the author who, rather than attempting to present a reasoned, well-structured rebuttal to the underlying premises of GoV and its writers, merely concentrates on an attack on their particular response to the gathering storm.

And, of course, one should not expect such a mind-set to offer an alternative solution because to do so would be to admit the existence of the threat in the first place, something about which Trouw and its fellow travellers are in a state of Pavlovian denial.

Consequently it is axiomatic that in such circumstances the only alternative that such Quislings have is to try to kill the messenger, and in that they will fail for the messenger really is not ‘Islamophobia’ and its progenitors but Islam itself – what it is, what it says and what it does before the eyes of anyone who cares to lift their head up out of the foetid trough of enforced multiculturism (ethnic cleansing) and look about them.

Seneca III

Nick said...

AB was apparently a big fan of Top Gear. Jeremy Clarkson has yet again opened his big mouth and said that nurses and teachers should be executed in front of their children.

Clarkson has previously made outrageous statements about people of other races, and disabled people.

Where's the outrage at AB being influenced by this elitist buffoon?

Obviously if someone took Mr. Clarkson as a role model - and AB apparently was a big fan - then you'd have a poisonous and "intolerant" worldview!

Nick said...

The underlying logical problem with essays such as the Englishman's is that if the people running the country won't "bully" or deport Islamists of whatever stripe, then they're certainly not going to sanction using direct force against them.

And the notion that the British citizenry will do so in defiance of their political leaders and in the face of the forces of law and order which currently do everything they can to stop people from standing on a street corner and even speaking about Islam - that's a total fantasy. Just try it and you'll be banged up quicker than you can say "Public Order Act".

So if the first two (and least extreme) options won't happen, then it does NOT follow that the Englishman's last (and most extreme) option will happen - that means that it won't happen, ever.

bilbo said...

a war between the west and islam IS coming.
we must be not just prepared for it but be able to fight it on our terms.
that may mean the use of violence and terrorism on a greater scale than even islamists could imagine.
it really will be them or us, i'de rather it were them.

Pierre_Picaud said...

I love articles like this.

They make me feel like such a naughty boy for reading all the "forbidden" stuff on GoV.

Anonymous said...

Nick said…
“…So if the first two (and least extreme) options won't happen, then it does NOT follow that the Englishman's last (and most extreme) option will happen - that means that it won't happen, ever.”

Seneca III says…
Nick, reference things never happening you may find the following of interest:

“Nobody now fears that a Japanese fleet could deal an unexpected blow at our Pacific possessions …Radio makes surprise impossible.”
[Josephus Daniels, former US Secretary of the Navy, 16 October, 1922]

“The day of the Battleship has not passed and it is highly unlikely that an airplane, or a fleet of them, could ever sink a fleet of navy vessels…”
[Franklin D. Roosevelt, US Ass’t Secretary of the Navy, 1922]

“As far as sinking a ship with a bomb is concerned, you just can’t do it.”
[Rear Admiral Clark Woodward, USN, 1939]

“Tora! Tora! Tora!”
[Japanese aviator, 7 December 1941]


Rgds, S III J

Lawrence said...

What amounts to a strawman argument like this against GoV serves little more than to illuminate the validity of GoV's point of view... as well as credibility.

It is intended to be insulting and intended to incite reaction. The more we react the greater chance they have at gaining control of the debate.

Or, we could say, the more we let them cause us to react the more control we give them over the debate.

George Pal said...

Next only to hearing from God that He is greatly pleased with you, comes hearing from the devil that you’ve been a great disappointment to him.

Next only to hearing from a GoV/ El Inglés reader how right you are, comes hearing from the ironically named Trouw – 'Loyalty' – what a danger you are... to Leftist delusions.

You New said...

GOV must be commended for being willing to publish in the gray spot where the legacy media has ignored their responsibility.

GOV comments are wide open for the he Society Destroyers to come and explain how GOV is all wrong. But so rarely do they ever comment. Know why? Take a look at this vaporous article with not even a quote. Boring.

Then you have Fjordman, El Ingles, interesting, reasoned stuff. I think GOV has better readership.

And Pierre Picaud, thanks for the big laugh. Hopefully Baron will put out more bad boy articles.

Nick said...

bilbo & s 3 J,
Nonsense, the pair of you. Once again, if the political elite won't take the most mild, "moderate" steps against Islamists within our own borders, then they're certainly not going to sanction the use of direct force against them (let alone the legalities of using military force within our own borders.)

And the general public sure aren't going to take to the streets and start waging a war - that's a complete fantasy.

Even if they wanted to (not the case) they wouldn't be allowed to. You see what's happened to Tommy Robinson and Guramit Singh for simply talking about Islam. The forces of law and order would crush anyone who actually lifted their hand against practitioners of the religion of peace.

These are blatantly obvious facts. Dreaming about some kind of "war" against Islamists is an immature wet-dream fantasy - which DOES mark the dreamer down as a "fellow traveller" of AB.

We'd do well to keep our feet on the ground and deal not in dreams but in cold, hard reality.

Henrik R Clausen said...

And why is the "world of the internet" !sLamOphObIc?

For the exact reason that relevant information can be easily found.

Except, of course, that 'phobia' denotes an irrational fear. There's absolutely nothing irrational about fearing Islam - though concrete real world action is a better approach dealing with the problems.

Mirco Romanato said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Nemesis said...

That article from Trouw highlights the lack of research into the subject raised and indicates a reliance on opinion based on ideals rather than facts which are plainly available to all who wish to walk the streets of their own country with their eyes wide open.

El Ingles article presents a future dilemma which our current crop of politicians appear to be avoiding by pushing the issues off onto the future holder of their political positions. In other words, the Buck is being passed onto the future holders of office and where it will stop is anybody's guess. And unless a political party such as the BNP, or Britain First can take the controls of power, the elite will stand idly by while England becomes overpopulated, overruled and out of control.

Nick in his comments, I believe, misses the point of El Ingles original article which is not that the third option, or the second or first options will be initiated by the authorities, but will come from the grass roots.

Nick, if you are reading this comment then you must by now realize that grass roots movement is already in motion in England and is spreading ever so slowly into Europe via the EDL.

Yes, I do realize that at this time the EDL goes to great pains to establish itself as a 'peaceful' movement, but don't you think that when the elite really start to push them that the 'peaceful' movement will turn into one of action? Or do you believe that the current members of the EDL are wimps without courage? I have always believed that for the EDL to survive and to grow, they would need to become political, which they now have.

So I see the EDL as the start of the beginning of the campaign to reclaim their own nation which will eventually become a movement so large that even the elite will not be able to contain them.

bilbo said...

Nick said...

" bilbo & s 3 J,
Nonsense, the pair of you. Once again, if the political elite won't take the most mild,..........."

you assume that the west will always be governed by leftist pro-Islamic turds that "lead" at the moment.
the political climate is changing and the right is on the rise.

Baron Bodissey said...

Mirco Romanato --

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.

For more information, guidelines for comments.

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

Mirco Romanato said...

@Nick,
If you had read the El Ingles essays you would have understood that the politicians will not endorse the use of violence, but they will not be able to prevent it.
Their ability (the ability of the government) to stop the clashes will be overwhelmed by the sheer number of attacks, number of people and difficulty to identify them from the normal people.
Not only this, but there will be a number (probably not a small number) of law enforces that will side with the natives / not islamic and look at the other side of the street when something happen.

The current economic collapse is exponential, like many other trends. But also the confrontation with the islamists will follow an exponential trend: at first there will be only single episodes far distanced, they they will become more frequent as the problem become worse. Then, before the unaware understand what is happening, there will be full scale clashes.

The current political class (left, right and center) will discredited in few months / years, as the economic disaster in front of the world will unfold. What credit will be last, if any, will not be enough to prevent anything from happening when [excrement impacts the circulation device].

Anonymous said...

say what you like about nick, but at least he doesn't accuse me of gnostic alienation. we must be thankful for such small mercies as we receive.

el ingles

babs said...

Pleading with our elected (and in the case of the EU, unelected representatives), to stop the tide of Islamization in the western world has seemed to fail.

Fjordman and Ingles only point out the obvious; that is that a significant percentage of people are fed up with the change in culture and the special status afforded to Muslims.

Should they be villified for this? I don't think so. This is a deliberate attack on the long standing culture of each country that our elected representitives have brought about.

I actually didn't think the article was all that bad. It will bring more people to GOV to read and ponder. That is a good thing.

magooey said...

Trouw says "Who guarantees their native countries will allow them to return?"
But we have been told that family reunification is so important for migration. Obviously, this must hold when people migrate back home.

What does international law say anyway about your home country? Should it not be the one place that cannot bar a person's entry under any circumstances?

Moving to a larger perspective,
the post-war intellectual and political elite have managed to engineer the importation of a civil war. Whether this was by petro-dollar corruption, one world dreamism, or the sheer creaking stupidity coming out of the Harvards of the West is irrelevant. It does stand to reason that when the Harper's Ferry raid of the imported civil war occurs, those responsible are busy pointing fingers away from themselves.

Anonymous said...

What kind of idiot writes an article trying to badmouth an internet site?

At best, he/she may get a bunch of people to go the site and agree with the author. But, at worst, he/she might be responsible for the site going viral. Anyway you look at it, the badmouther drives traffic to the site.

So thanks Trouw for being double stupid. Your efforts only help the counter-jihad movement.

Bob Smith
http://islamsfatalflaw.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

No critical press in Norway

The Labor press recently bought a group of newspapers in a country which has no critical daily press.

Somebody with the means, could do business in Norway, with a people that traditionally has been known as a newspaper reading people.

Why is there no critical daily press in Norway today?
- The 68'ers have for a long time, been occupying strategic positions in the media, the universities, publishing houses, etc

Remembering the political commentator Versto who understood and expressed opinions the Norwegians could agree with, and who died this summer.

Who is now speaking for Norwegians in the press? Nobody?

Here's a great challenge to somebody interested in combining business and media, filling the void.

Thought control is getting a tighter grip on Norwegians on a daily basis.


Fjordman and Rustad called as witnesses - Breivik case

Today, VG is announcing that Fjordman and the excellent Hans Rustad, editor at document.no, are being called as witnesses to the Breivik case, and will be close to held responsible for Breivik's "opinions".

Breivik's lawyer Geir Lippestad accuses Fjordman and Rustad of sharing the reponsibility for Breivik's "terror actions", according to VG.

Why don't they, the press, and the lawyer, instead look at the facts about immigration in Norway, and the West as a whole in search for the real motive?

http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/oslobomben/artikkel.php?artid=10032175

Sagunto said...

About this fringe, lamestream newspaper "Trouw". Few people read it in Holland, and the few who still do, are lost cases anyway. Most Dutchies know them to be the PCP's (politically correct protestants) that they are.


Baron -

Many thnx for posting Mirco Romanato's refutation of Nick's assertions about the political establishment.

Nick is right of course, about the nomenklatura elect and their determination about crushing popular dissent, but I agree with Mirco that such focussing on a class that will be thoroughly discredited by the global financial disaster anyway, is beside the point of El Ingles' great contributions here on GoV. His articles put the spotlight on us, the people. In the final analysis, its all about our determination, starting with a few of us, not that of our wise political overlords.


Nick -

"Dreaming about some kind of "war" against Islamists is an immature wet-dream fantasy - which DOES mark the dreamer down as a "fellow traveller" of AB."

I understand the sentiment, but nevertheless, I find this kind of finger-pointing at fellow CJs rather unfortunate.
Moreover, AB wasn't just dreaming of a war against "Islamists", quite the contrary, he fantasized about colluding with Islamic activists in a violent struggle against the political establishment.


El Ingles -

Glad you're still here man.

Take care,
Sag

Sagunto said...

I'd like to view this obvious smear job from a slightly different angle and focus on the ideological background of both the author and this newspaper.

One thing is puzzling and should be mentioned right away: Mr Eildert Mulder is not a single-minded Islamophile. He has co-authored a book that presents an overview of scholarly research undermining the historical narrative about Islam. Sources are questioned and even the existence of the "Prophet" is presented as doubtful.

So how can this man, critical of Islam as a religion that might as well be fake, use terms like "islamophobic" and all?

My guess is, that here's a typical cultural Calvinist, who likes to frame the whole debate about Islam in a way that suits the biased historical self-understanding of his denomination. Implicitly using a sanitized version of the Calvinist revolt (more a Flemish than a Dutch revolt anyway), the author claims the moral and historical high ground that can only be reached by way of discussion, and discussion alone. Islam, he asserts, must be taken to task by examining its sources and then justly criticized for its lack of historical veracity. That in itself is already perfectly in tune with the salon-Calvinist reading of history, in that an oppressive religion must be criticized by courageous activists who challenge the official historical rendition of its foundations.

One problem with this bit of flattering protestant self-projection, is of course that it loves to treat the Islam-debate as exactly that, a debate, preferably among "critical" academics, mimicking the old Calvinist tradition as envisioned by the author. Forget about the fact that en passant, Calvinist violence and warm alliance with Islam during the "Dutch" revolt are glossed over and swept under the carpet. This author's typical knack for "critical" intellectualism, is widespread among people who will always be abhorred by "populism".

Over here, cultural Calvinists are of a kind that always seeks to use the power of the state to bring about social change [a characteristic shared with those who can historically be seen as their zealous successors, radical "enlightenment" secularists].
This high-minded statism is partly due to the fact that, for some time, Calvinism was the official religion of the Dutch state. People like Mr Mulder still have in the back of their minds this Calvinist trinity: the State, God, and Orange (the French speaking, German "nobles", who forged strong ties with the Ottoman empire).

That's where i.m.o. the rub is with articles bringing popular discontent into focus. Cultural Calvinists like Mr Mulder don't like the idea of the people taking matters into their own hands. Instead of fending for ourselves, we must discuss the questionable origins of the Islamic religion, and all will be fine, just like before.

Like hell it won't.

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag

Jolie Rouge said...

No printed newspaper would allow these kinds of stories on the opinion page.

Would the author deny that to walk through any major European city will reveal a major shift in the ethnic balance of those cities.

Ethnic engineering and demographic dabbling that on a broader historical time scale could be viewed as the slow motion ethnic cleansing of the indigenous populations.

Reams and reams of this slow motion ethnic cleansing propaganda can be found in the printed newspapers and other mainstream media under the subtle and misleading titles of diversity, equality and multiculturalism.

You New said...

Sagunto,

Yes, I agree that we need to find the source of the maddness. As you know, my inclination is to see political correctness and multiculturalism as being merely a bit of the technique (not at all an end in itself) of the very forces you speak about:

1. Marxism (socialist/communist/utopian.)
2. Fradulent Religionism (cultural calvinism and similar.)

Please add:

3. Synergism of the two (a highly toxic and powerful combination of 1 and 2.)

Trying to yell down political correctness is the current manner of the counter jihad. I prefer to look directly at the sources which are behind the current conscious and unconscious revolutionary technologies of pc and mc.

Nick said...

This notion that the political elites throughout Europe will be somehow "discredited" and therefore unable or unwilling to act against a popular uprising is an interesting one.

Of course politicians in Europe have been "discredited" long ago. Every morally sane, rational person living in Europe knows perfectly well that each and every politician is a worthless piece of trash whose only skills are lying and riding the political gravy train for as long as possible in order to avoid having to work for a living.

I can only think of one exception to the rule and that is the good Mr. Wilders from the Netherlands.

But - that doesn't mean that politicians will be either unwilling or unable to crack down on the actions of the riff raff who dare to be intolerant and extreme and act against practitioners of the religion of peace. They will, and they can.

Saying otherwise is just wishful thinking.

to be cont...

Nick said...

I've said it on GoV several times now - our real adversary is in fact those very politicians, and their lackeys in the mainstream media and throughout "the establishment".

The worse things get, the more those people will crack down on any dissenting voice. The more extreme will be the measures they will use against the likes of the Englishman, or the owners of blogs like this one etc.

You don't believe me? Look at what happened post-AB. Think of what would happen if a similar incident happened tomorrow. Would politicians in Europe say oh dearie me that's us discredited, let's all go home? Of course not.

They'd come after the likes of the Englishman who wrote that essay, and blogs like GoV - with a vengeance!

Isn't that correct?

Those people will go to any lengths - say anything, do anything - in order to maintain their position.

You don't believe me? Wait and see ...

Nick said...

"Baron -

Many thnx for posting Mirco Romanato's refutation of Nick's assertions about the political establishment. - Sagunto."

It was a response, not a refutation. And that response doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

"@Nick,
If you had read the El Ingles essays you would have understood that the politicians will not endorse the use of violence, but they will not be able to prevent it."

Wrong. They will do everything in their power to prevent "it".


"Their ability (the ability of the government) to stop the clashes will be overwhelmed by the sheer number of attacks, number of people and difficulty to identify them from the normal people."

That's a complete fantasy. AB territory.


"Not only this, but there will be a number (probably not a small number) of law enforces that will side with the natives / not islamic and look at the other side of the street when something happen."

Keep dreaming. You just go ahead and test your theory my boy - raise your hand to an "islamic" and you'll be run in before you can say "Public Order Act".

And as I've said, that's not going to change just because European poltiicians are seen to be a bunch of incompetent amoral crooks. We all know that already. If the pretense that they're acting in our best interests is stripped away, and European politicians are engaged in a naked struggle for power - what lengths do you think they'll go to?

They'll do anything to keep their grimy hands on the reins of power. Absolutely anything.

Mark my words.

Nick said...

"Baron -

Many thnx for posting Mirco Romanato's refutation of Nick's assertions about the political establishment. - Sagunto."

It was a response, not a refutation. And that response doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

"@Nick,
If you had read the El Ingles essays you would have understood that the politicians will not endorse the use of violence, but they will not be able to prevent it."

Wrong. They will do everything in their power to prevent "it".


"Their ability (the ability of the government) to stop the clashes will be overwhelmed by the sheer number of attacks, number of people and difficulty to identify them from the normal people."

That's a complete fantasy. AB territory.


"Not only this, but there will be a number (probably not a small number) of law enforces that will side with the natives / not islamic and look at the other side of the street when something happen."

Keep dreaming. You just go ahead and test your theory my boy - raise your hand to an "islamic" and you'll be run in before you can say "Public Order Act".

And as I've said, that's not going to change just because European poltiicians are seen to be a bunch of incompetent amoral crooks. We all know that already. If the pretense that they're acting in our best interests is stripped away, and European politicians are engaged in a naked struggle for power - what lengths do you think they'll go to?

They'll do anything to keep their grimy hands on the reins of power. Absolutely anything.

Mark my words.

Chiu said...

I was reminded of an interesting show about vampires which dispensed with a lot of the moral cliches commonly associated with such stories in Western fiction (even as it embraced the conventions of vampires with regard to behavior/abilities/weaknesses far more than is currently common).

In Shiki (meaning something like "undead"), the vampires are still the same people they were before 'death', just with different biological needs than they had as humans. They respond differently to becoming vampires depending on their prior moral outlooks and individual will. But in order to survive, they must feed.

And, as the isolated Japanese town where the story is set begins to suffer the depredations of an epidemic of vampires, the residents eventually realize that they, too, must cast aside certain social inhibitions if they are to survive (a not insignificant plot point is that the majority of those killed by vampires do not rise again as vampires).

I don't believe the show is designed as a commentary on the infiltration of Europe by Koranic Islam. But there are some interesting parallels due to the absence of any "vampires are evil/good/gross/cool" imposition on the characters. The inculcation of a cult of death among the vampires is explored (along with the eventual response of the humans), but left mostly uncontrasted with alternatives. It is interesting to note that the vampires don't actually need to feed at an unsustainable rate (by what is presented, a vampire with a 'herd' of a hundred or so humans needn't actually kill any of them through exsanguination). This is not left totally unmentioned (it is, in fact, an eventual plot point), but it is irrelevant to the conflict because the vampires have decided on eliminating the entire human population of the town (presumably 'sustainable' use would be left for later).

Perhaps most interesting is those who, while still human, choose to side with the vampires for one reason or another. One such person is followed as a main character, the series showcases his flawed moral reasoning which applies a double standard to the humans fighting for survival as opposed to the vampires killing to satiate their hunger. His thinking is not really 'criticized', but is powerfully contrasted with the behavior of others who act to defend humanity.

It isn't a show for the faint-hearted who imagine that one can simply wish for a world in which nobody ever has to confront the question of death.

Chiu Chun-Ling.

Nick said...

"you assume that the west will always be governed by leftist pro-Islamic turds that "lead" at the moment.
the political climate is changing and the right is on the rise" - bilbo.

No I assume, correctly, that the West is governed by leftist pro-Islamic turds. The point I'm making is that they won't give up power without a fight. And they'll resort to any means to maintain their status. Any means.

As for "the right" (whoever that might be) being on the rise - well you just get back to me when you can name one politician in the United Kingdom who is from "the right" who wields actual political power.

I'm not holding my breath ...

Everyone here seems to have a difficult time grasping the nature of our true adversary. Islam is what it has always been. Reading one or two history books will set anyone right on that score.

But the people who have wormed their way through our societies and managed to get themselves into positions of power are the ones who are going to come after people who use blogs like GoV. Those people are evil, lying, thiefs who will pervert reality, truth, logic and any system of ethics or morality you care to name in order to put riff raff like us down, and maintain their own state (of power).

And the worse things get, the worse they'll get. Just watch.

Sagunto said...

You New -

I like your style, and share your preferred level of analysis.

Take care my friend, always a pleasure to read your thoughtful comments.

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag

Sagunto said...

Nick -

Since you forgot to specify the particular reason why I stated that the political establishment will be - quite literally - discredited, I thought I'd do wel to mention it once again, this time with some emphasis added:

"[..] but I agree with Mirco that such focussing on a class that will be thoroughly discredited by the global financial disaster anyway [..]"

You say they will crack down on popular dissent, and I agree. You also claim that they can. Here's where some measure of disagreement is in order, depending on how much emphasis one is placing on the global financial disaster. Should the welfare states continue on the road towards utterly destroying their currencies, there won't be that much to do for these bureaucrats elect. When you're broke as a state, you simply don't have a business (running people's lives) anymore.

Cheers,
Sag

Mirco Romanato said...

@Nick
I never argued that the government politicians will not try to suppress people reactions to increasing islamization, I'm sure they will try to do so.

They will fail because They will not have the same resources they have now and they had in the past.

Limited resources will force them to reduce police forces, military, social programs and so on. Without these, the people will not be as easy as in the past to be bribed in submission.

A common misconception is to think that these phenomenon are linear. They are not. They are exponential. Initially they are small and the growth appear slow but, when they take off, they grow at lightning speed.

This is true both for the number of people and for their state of mind.

Aeon said...

You can't control where Breivik's going with this. He's going to do his best to provoke the left-wing to do their worst. He's not insane - he's vicious and seriously wily.

He's got one agenda. Making the left wing worse, making Muslims worse, and making the damage control blogosphere work for him are all good for him. Squirming works for him. Protestation works for him. Distancing works.

He isn't getting out of jail or a psychiatric unit. He's still got his goal in mind, and so long as he has breath and a potential audience this isn't going away.

I'm going to recommend all of you take the unusual route, the one that seems wrong on its face. The one that will hurt at first.

Own him.

For the effective future, he's effectively cut everyone off from any other winning solution.

If he runs out of his ability to be "selfless" on behalf of his chosen kin, he's going to go spiteful to reduce your fitness and open the field up to the left wing to get really bad as fast as possible.

You didn't put him in your tribe - he put himself there, and the whole media is going to make sure he's wearing your colours.

He's our lost child. We are angry with him. Sad for his victims. Crushed by his actions. If only he could have been louder so we could help him away from such a terrible idea, shown him a better way. This is not the way we want it.

Nick said...

Sag,
States which are a financial disaster area are not in the business of exerting control over the people inside borders? Really?

It's not too hard to think of counterexamples - states that have existed which have been a financial disaster area, but which have exerted extreme control over their citizenry.

I do see your point, that politicians & their lackeys will do everything they can to maintain their state (of power) but that they'll run out of money & be unable to do so - however they'll still do so as long as they can, & my contention is that hoping they'll run out of steam, or rather money, is just wishful thinking. Given the nature of our true adversary, it seems pretty clear that the worse things become, the more politicians & their lackeys will try to exert control.

Will there ever be a tipping point where the states throughout Europe break down & we all go to hell in a handbasket?

If we ever get to that point, we'll first have to endure what I'm talking about. That'll be pretty bad, & it'll get worse as things in general get worse.

And if we ever get to the point where everything breaks down altogether & we all live in something like the "state of nature" then we'll have a whole new set of problems to consider, & what it says in the hadith will be the least of our worries.

Remember the English riots? I can't help thinking of Thomas Hobbes ...

bilbo said...

its worth remembering that, at least in the UK, the police etc. are dependant on volunteers.
these volunteers, it has already been noted in the UK press, are of diminishing quality and quantity.
who would want to set their nations(and their own)security on an army or police force that is funtionaly illiterate and inclined to rebelion?
they sow the seeds of their own destruction in more ways than one.
as the labour party arose from the dreams and pockets of the workers, so new parties can arise.
revolution can take many forms.

Nick said...

On and btw: "Not only this, but there will be a number (probably not a small number) of law enforces that will side with the natives / not islamic and look at the other side of the street when something happen"

In today's news. A 2nd link. And do read Paul Weston's article on this very blog. Then, after you've done that, go back and try to explain how the forces of law and order in this country will behave in the way you imagine.

Good luck with that.

Egghead said...

Why is everyone acting like legally insane Breivik is in control of the agenda or message?

The counter-jihad warned against the creation of an indigenous Breivik by immigrant-Muslophiles.

Immigrant-Muslophiles own Breivik.

And they know it (!) - which is WHY immigrant-Muslophiles are trying to obfuscate....

Aeon said...

He isn't insane, and if he is he is still dangerous. Acknowledging he owns the message right now is only to note reality.

Where he doesn't, the left-wing loonies do, and the media is going to fee this beast for a good show.

You want some control? You want to live? Get out of the building that Breivik is about to blow up.

Own him. Take the hit, and ride the beast.

Then know your message. And no, you don't really know your message. You are all over the place, and you cannot afford to be.

You're going to have to learn to dial back your unsupportable rhetoric and take a hardline only where you are strong. Be more reasonable than reasonable.

You're looking for a Pan-European conservative movement. You're looking to protect your culture, and that culture has since the time immemorial contained a component of cultural exchange while allowing them to continue to be themselves.

You have precedent in other conservative movements. Conservation of good things is always to humanities advantage.

You want some examples of working conservative movements of this nature. They exist. I suggest looking into the one in Canada - it worked very well.

That you don't want people to get these wrongheaded ideas in their head. You want them to have a constructive homeland, and a political realistic place for them to go and be heard and known.

There isn't another way. I know you want there to be, but there isn't. You'll either grab this wild horse and ride it until you tame it, or your are going to be trampled and if you live through it you'll be lame and maimed.

Sagunto said...

Nick -

"States which are a financial disaster area are not in the business of exerting control over the people inside borders? Really?"

No, not really. Not my point in any case.

If you'd demonstrate a willingness not to distort what I'm actually saying, I'll be more than happy to engage in a meaningful exchange of viewpoints.

Until then, take care,
Sag

Nick said...

Hey, any time you want to try to deal with the OBVIOUS points I've made, feel free to do so.

If you want to argue that the states in Europe will all go bust and we'll be living in what is known in philosophy-speak as the state of nature, well you can make that argument if you wish.

However, until that happens, politicians and their lackeys will do their utmost to maintain their state (of power). They will use any and all means to do so. They will sink to any level. And as I'm sure you realise, people like Fjordman, the Baron and maybe even you, could easily find yourselves in the firing line.

If you don't believe me, just look at what's happened to Fjordman. And imagine what would happen if ther was an ABII.

And btw if we all end up living in the "state of nature" then writing about what the hadith says on a blog somewhere will not be high on anyone's list of priorities.

We'll be trying to stay alive - the recent English riots will be nothing - absolutely nothing - compared with everyone having to live in the "state of nature" for real.

So if this supposed popular uprising against the forces of Islam will only take place at that point - it never will take place at all.

Nick said...

And just to undermine this wet dream fantasy once and for all - this incredible notion that there will be some sort of "grassroots" uprising which will result in the forced deportation or even g***cide - I refuse to even say the word - of Muslims throughout the country ...

There will be NO such uprising, no such actions, and that's all there is about it. People at the "grassroots" level, i.e. working class people, have houses and families to worry about, and they're not going to put all that they have worked for at risk to go off gallavanting about the UK knocking off Muslims - the very notion is ABSURD!

The govt won't do it, the armed forces wont (and aren't legally allowed to) do it, the "bobbies" certainly won't do it, the judiciary wont' do it, and the citizenry wont' do it.

And if nobody's going to do it, then it's not going to happen.

It's just a wet dream fantasy that shows that there are "fellow travellers" of AB out there.

It's time for a REALITY CHECK for goodness sake!

Aeon said...

Not even Breivik advocated genocide. You are letting the media control the message by not knowing that.

Anonymous said...

Aeon - he didn't advocate genocide, but the PC/MC MA100 do, against the natives

AS

Aeon said...

There has always been a component of cultural and genetic exchange in Europe.

When it crosses over into colonization, it isn't acceptable.

You need to own more moderate language man. You can hold your principles and make them more palatable. Do so.

Chiu said...

What is this business about "owning" Breivik? Breivik's actions (the murderous slaughter of a bunch of schoolchildren on holiday, in case anyone is forgetting that part) disqualify him from being seriously considered as any kind of representative of those who had not even imagined that such an action was a possible response to Jihad.

Had Breivik wiped out a den of a gang pimping underaged girls (a scenario that does appear in some of the writings posted by members of the Counter-Jihad), I would see the relevance of saying that the Counter-Jihad should own him. But given that Breivik's actions seem much more in line with Islamic violence (the victims were almost all white infidels, after all), it makes more sense to suggest that the Muslims should "own" him.

If you mean that the Counter-Jihad should "own" Breivik in the same way that they "own" all other cases of violence against indigenous Europeans by various members of the global Jihad, then I suppose I can understand even if I think that the terminology is being misused in that case.

Chiu Chun-Ling.