Moe's Jihad News

What Arab Spring? This is the Mohammedan Revival!

2012-02-03T01:54:00.000-08:00

GLENN BECK: One year anniversary of the Arab ‘Spring’ that wasn’t

Glenn does an excellent job of exposing how all the media got it so wrong about the Arab Spring, the coming global Islamic Caliphate, the threat of Sharia law in America, and the dangers to our security of doing nothing to stop Islamic infiltration of the West.

Glenn is joined by Islamic Terrorism experts: Eric Stakelbeck, Frank Gaffney, and General Jerry Boykin

Indictment of the Media! - GBTV

PART 1

Who Is Abdullah ibn Sa'd ibn Abi Sarh?

2011-12-30T17:37:00.000-08:00

Thanks to Answering Muslims

This video brings up one of the most embarrassing stories in the early Muslim sources. Abdullah ibn Sa'd ibn Abi Sarh converted to Islam and served as one of Muhammad's scribes. However, when Muhammad started letting him edit the Qur'an and add his own words, Abdullah realized that Muhammad was a false prophet.

For more on Abdullah, see these articles:

"Sources of the Qur'an: Contributions by Abdullah ibn Sa'd ibn Abi Sarh"
"How Allah Killed His Prophet: From Inspiration to Expiration"

Fjordman: “This is the greatest organized betrayal in Western history.”

2011-08-07T09:35:00.000-07:00

“The European Union is the principal motor behind the Islamization of Europe. It is formally surrendering an entire continent to Islam while destroying established national cultures, and is prepared to harass those who disagree with this policy.

“This is the greatest organized betrayal in Western history.”

— Fjordman

Different Rules for Different Fools (GOV)

On the Radicalization of Anders Behring Breivik

The Scandinavians on the team went to bed that night with only the sketchiest of ideas about what had happened. While they slept, a Swedish Nazi website put up a post identifying the killer as Fjordman, and linking to Gates of Vienna. Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs picked up that story — taking Nazis as a credible source, how typical! — and helped direct massive traffic to our blog. By the next morning the mainstream media in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden had picked up the lie and repeated it, and the deluge was upon us.

Read more »

Fjordman, Fairness, and the Brevik Mass Murderer

August 5th, 2011 by Andrew Bostom |

Today my colleague, the perspicacious Norwegian essayist Fjordman (whose prolific writings can be read here), was compelled to surrender his anonymity after reluctantly granting an interview to Verdans Gang (published in English,here).

An hysterical, morally cretinous press and blogosphere—Norwegian, other European, and American—which had initially accused Fjordman, falsely and recklessly, of being the Brevik mass murderer, continues to persist that he was Brevik’s “main inspiration,” a charge akin to accusing the Beatles of “inspiring” Charles Manson, or Jody Foster “inspiring” John Hinckley.

Even the relatively fair and staid Verdans Gang interview labels the apolitical Fjordman as “far right.” When reading the interview, consider that the ongoing major “accusation” against Fjordman is that his reasoned critique of cultural relativism—echoed by mainstream Western European leaders Sarkozy, Cameron, and Merkel—“precipitated” the murderous insanity of Brevik. This is another absurd and slanderous allegation which brings to mind these words cited (on p. 362) in the cut and paste Brevik “manifesto” from eminence grise Bernard Lewis—an icon of the American mainstream, including the mainstream right—none of whom would dare identify Lewis as Brevik’s “inspiration”:

Prof. Bernard Lewis warned in The Jerusalem Post that Islam could soon be the dominant force in a Europe “Europeans are losing their own self-confidence,” he said. “They have no respect for their own culture” and have “surrendered” on every issue with regard to Islam in a mood of “self-abasement and political correctness.”

Below is the Verdans Gang interview of Fjordman which also includes his photo, and has forced him into hiding.

(VG Nett) In an exclusive interview with VG, Peder Jensen (36) sheds his alias as the right wing blogger «Fjordman», and talks about his shock at being cited as an influence by terrorist Anders Behring Breivik.

- I am Fjordman, says Peder Jensen

Thursday he was questioned for several hours by Norwegian police about his supposed interaction with Breivik (32).

Under the alias «Fjordman», he has been a prolific blogger on different far-right websites, and was cited extensively in Breivik’s rambling manifesto.

The 36 year old man, originally from the coastal town of Ålesund, agreed to an interview in a café in Oslo Thursday evening.

In accordance with his lawyer, he has elected to be interviewed in VG using his real name, and asks that journalists do not contact his neighbors or family.

- I have warned my family about this interview, and because of my own safety, I’m now going into hiding, says Jensen.

Soft spoken and unassuming, he is dressed in a white t-shirt and dark jeans. He says he was horrified at being cited a total of 111 times in Breivik’s 1500 page manifesto.

- I have not read the manifesto, but I have seen bits and pieces referred in the media, and some parts have been shown to me by others, he says.

During the period between 2009 and 2010 he received a handful of emails from Breivik, where he told Jensen that he was working on a book. In one email written towards the end of 2009, he also asked if he could meet his political idol «Fjordman». Jensen refused.

- I don’t know why he wanted to meet me, but I declined. Not because of his extreme views, but because he didn’t seem very interesting – like a vacuum cleaner salesman. «Pie in the sky», I thought to myself when I re-read the emails, says Jensen, again stressing that he never met Breivik personally.

Police sources confirm that Jensen has been questioned as the blogger «Fjordman», and that they are certain of his identity.

- I feel it’s my duty to give a statement to the police, and I wanted to do this interview because my name eventually would have emerged anyway, resulting in a media frenzy. It is also a way for me to clear my name, says Jensen.

Norwegian police confiscated his computer Thursday, and even though he was questioned as a witness, he feels that the police are looking to implicate him.

- They won’t find anything on my computer regarding any criminal matters or Breivik, he says.

Jensen has a masters degree in culture and technology from the University of Oslo, and has studied Arabic at the University of Bergen and the American University in Cairo. In his master’s dissertation he wrote about censorship and blogging in Iran.

He has never been a member of any political party in Norway, and after completing his compulsory military service, he says he has never touched a gun.

After the terrorist attack and his blog being cited as an influence, Jensen says he will never use the alias «Fjordman» again.

- I don’t wish to be associated with Breivik and his horrible actions, he says.

"He is a true follower of Prophet Muhammad. He has fulfilled Sharia. Converting a non-Muslim is a pious act. Only a true Muslim can do that.”

2011-08-06T18:36:00.000-07:00

"Respectable" takes on a different meaning in Pakistan

Update:

Pakistan: Bishop of Islamabad warns forced conversions to Islam are rising as another Christian girl is abducted

As with the situation in Egypt, this is not at all the first time we have seen such behavior in Pakistan. Two such prominent cases in Pakistan have been those of Saba (or Sarah) and Anila Masih, and Farah Hatim.
The news organization Fides has reported that "at least 700 Christian girls are kidnapped and forced to convert to Islam every year." Hindu girls are targeted as well, and many cases go unreported, or are brushed aside by authorities.

Here is yet another case. Thankfully, Mariam Gill was returned to her family, but not surprisingly, her thwarted captor is making threats.

» 08/06/2011 13:24
PAKISTAN
Punjab: Christian woman forced to convert and marry her kidnapper
by Jibran Khan

Mariam Gill was abducted on her way home from the market. Her father and brother filed a complaint with police, which failed to intervene however because her kidnapper is “a respectable Muslim businessman”. A Muslim religious leader says the action was in accordance with Islamic law. Islamabad bishop warns that cases of forced conversion are “rising at an alarming rate”.

Islamabad (AsiaNews) – Another young Christian woman in Pakistan has been abducted and forced to convert to Islam and marry her kidnapper. Despite a formal complaint, police did not intervene because the author of the crime is a “respectable businessman”. Local Muslim religious authorities also claim that the woman’s conversion was legal. However, her case however is similar to that of Farah Hatim (see Jibran Khan, “The drama of Farah Hatim, common to many women in Pakistan,” in AsiaNews 25 July 2011) and is indicative of a climate of impunity for people who abuse Christian women. The bishop of Islamabad warns that the “the cases of forced conversion are rising at an alarming rate”.

Mariam is a young Christian woman from Kahota, a town some 20 kilometres from Pakistan’s capital of Islamabad. She was abducted on Wednesday by one Muhammad Junaid, a local Muslim, who forcibly converted her to Islam and married her.

The young woman’s father, Munir Gill, said that Junaid is an “important businessman”. He had “his eyes on my daughter and asked her for marriage.” He complained to the man’s fathers “without results”.

“Mariam went to the market on Wednesday, but never returned,” said her brother Sohail Gill. “We searched for her everywhere. Some people in the market told us that they saw Muhammad Junaid forcefully taking Mariam from the market. We went to the police to register a case, but they delayed the application and showed no interest in the matter.”

Yesterday, a local Muslim religious leader, Maulana Hafeez Aziz, “converted Mariam to Islam and celebrated her marriage with Muhammad Junaid”.

“Muhammad Junaid is a respectable Muslim businessman,” said Amir Mirza, a police officer in Kahota. “The young woman converted and married him of ‘her own free will’.

For Maulana Hafeez Aziz, “Muhammad Junaid is a true follower of Prophet Muhammad. He has fulfilled Sharia. Converting a non-Muslim is a pious act. Only a true Muslim can do that.”

Yesterday, Mariam Gill was interrogated by local officials. She told them that she was abducted and forced to convert and that she has no intention of abandoning Christianity.

At the end of the meeting, they decided to return the young woman to her family, urging the two sides to reach an agreement. However, Muhammad Junaid issued threats, saying that if he did not get the young woman back, there would be “terrible consequences” to pay.

Contacted by AsiaNews, the bishop of Islamabad Rufin Anthony described the case as “a dreadful incident”. In his view, “the cases of forced conversion are rising at an alarming rate. The matter needs to be checked, kidnapping of Christian girls is becoming a common practice in Punjab. Law enforcement agencies need to enforce the law.”

Young Christian women are not alone. Many young Hindu women have been forced to flee across the border into India in the face of government and police indifference.

“It is time to take concrete action to guarantee the safety of minorities in Pakistan,” the prelate said.

Infiltration, Subversion & PC

2011-08-06T09:03:00.000-07:00

Military's 'PC' Approach Blinds it to Jihadist Threats

by Robert Maginnis

The thwarted bombing by a U.S. Army jihadist outside Fort Hood in Texas intensifies fears there is a serious homegrown terrorist threat and raises questions about whether our politically correct (PC) military can identify internal threats.

Last Wednesday, U.S. Army Private First Class Naser Jason Abdo, who had requested conscientious objector status because of his Muslim beliefs, allegedly planned to “get even” for unspecified mistreatment by detonating two shrapnel-packed bombs inside a restaurant frequented by soldiers near Fort Hood, according to ABC News. But the AWOL soldier’s plans were thwarted by operational mistakes that led to his arrest.

Police arrested Abdo at his Killeen, Tex., motel, where they found bomb-making materials, firearms and ammunition. Officials told ABC News they also found a copy of an article titled, “How to Build a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom,” a feature article from Inspire, the English-language magazine by the terror group Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).

On Friday Abdo was charged in a Waco, Tex., court with possession of an illegal firearm in addition to previous charges of possession of child pornography and going AWOL from his unit. After his hearing, he yelled “Iraq 2006” and the name of an Iraqi girl who was raped and murdered in 2006 by U.S. soldiers. Then as he was led from the courtroom, he shouted, “Nidal Hasan!,” “Fort Hood!” and “2009!”

Abdo’s case is another example of the danger of homegrown lone-wolf militants. His shouted reference to “Nidal Hasan,” the jihadist charged with 13 murders and 32 attempted murders at Fort Hood in 2009, and the discovery of a copy of the Inspirearticle in his motel room suggest Abdo’s inspiration comes from Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical American-born Islamic cleric and AQAP leader.

Al-Awlaki is believed to have inspired Hasan via e-mails, along with Umar Abdulmutallab, the Christmas 2009 underwear bomber of Northwest flight 253, who allegedly told U.S. officials he was in contact with al-Awlaki prior to that bombing. Faisal Shahzad, who pleaded guilty to attempting to detonate a bomb in Times Square in 2010, admitted he too was inspired by al-Awlaki and said after his sentencing, “War with Muslims has just begun … the defeat of the U.S. is imminent, God willing.”

The incidence of homegrown terrorism has increased significantly in the past two years, according to a 2011 report by the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Specifically, from May 2009 to November 2010, there were 22 different homegrown plots by al-Qaeda, its affiliates and ideological allies. By comparison, there were just 21 plots from September 2001 to May 2009.

It is important to understand that most of the new terrorists were radicalized via the Internet. A 2008 U.S. Senate report predicted homegrown terrorism inspired by violent Islamist extremist ideology would increase due to the focused online efforts of that ideology’s adherents.

Internet-savvy jihadist wannabes learn the ideology’s core goals from their cyber mentors: a global caliphate that strives for Sharia (Islamic law) enforced by government and allegiance given to the Islamist community (the Ummah) and none else. This network believes violence is justified to accomplish these goals and anyone who opposes it is an enemy.

The New York City Police Department developed a four-part framework to understand how these homegrown Islamists are radicalized: pre-radicalization (acquire openness to the ideology), self-identification (adherents search for answers to their grievances), indoctrination (embrace ideology that the world is in a struggle against the West), and violence. The violence stage is reached when members accept their duty to commit violence, seek training and plan attacks.

As disconcerting as the surging threat of Internet-savvy homegrown Islamists may be, it is arguably more troubling that our military seems to be so PC that it can’t identify internal extremist threats. That is especially troubling because over the past two years, eight Islamist attacks have been planned or carried out against military installations in the U.S., according to the Associated Press.

But political correctness has swayed the military’s culture regarding all things Islamic, thus making identifying Islamic extremists less likely. For example, the Pentagon’s 86-page review of the 2009 Fort Hood massacre, “Protecting the Force: Lessons from Fort Hood,” doesn’t mention the words “Muslim,” “Islam,” “jihad,” “Sharia,” or “Koran,” even though Maj. Hasan initiated his slaughter with the scream “Allahu Akbar,” Arabic for “God is great,” and he is a confirmed Islamist. Worse, none of the report’s recommendations would have stopped Hasan’s attack or the one planned by Pfc. Abdo.

Unfortunately the Fort Hood report is but one of many examples of the military’s PC blindness when it comes to criticizing Islam. Last year, for example, Franklin Graham, the son of evangelist Billy Graham, was invited to speak at the Pentagon’s National Day of Prayer, but days prior to the event his invitation was withdrawn because he once described Islam as “evil.” Army spokesman Gary Tallman told Fox News that Graham’s “presence at the event may be taken by some [read Muslims] as inappropriate for a government agency.”

President Obama’s advisers advanced this PC agenda by exorcising religious terms such as “Islamic extremism” from the U.S. National Security Strategy and directed the Pentagon to rewrite strategy documents that viewed Muslim nations through the lens of terror. For example, the 128-page 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review outlines the country’s terrorist threat without using the words “Islam,” “Islamic” or Islamist” a single time.

President George W. Bush also kowtowed to Muslim sensibilities, which contributed to the Islamist-shy military culture. Bush gave the White House its first Koran, hosted its first iftar (fast-breaking) dinner to celebrate Ramadan, and launched a Muslim outreach program giving “legitimacy” to some Islamic organizations that promote an ideology similar to al-Qaeda.

Then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England guided the Pentagon’s pro-Muslim campaign, which included hiring an Islamic aide, Hesham Islam, who had links with the radical Muslim Brotherhood. England cavorted with leaders of Islamic groups such as the Islamic Society of North America, a front organization for the Muslim Brotherhood. His outreach program created military-wide cultural fear of being vilified as “Islamophobic,” which was evidenced by the case of Stephen Coughlin, a military intelligence analyst.

Coughlin said he was hired to “… set aside the feel-good assumptions about Islam … and take an unblinkered look at the facts.” But Coughlin was eventually sacked after a run-in with England’s Muslim aide, who labeled his views “Islamophobic,” according to Fox News.

England also set out to recruit more Muslims. He set up Muslim prayer rooms on military installations, hired imams and hosted an iftar for the Muslim American community and Muslim service members. “There is a message here, and that is that Muslims and the Islamic religion are totally compatible with Western values,” England told the Christian Science Monitor.

These pro-Muslim actions across two administrations created a military cultural firewall around Islam. That was evident at the Fort Hood memorial service following the 2009 massacre. Gen. George Casey, the Army chief of staff, never mentioned the Islamist factor in the massacre but made statements expressing concern about “force protection,” the potential heightened “backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers” and the risk to Army “diversity.”

The Pentagon must shed its blindness regarding violent Islamist extremism among service members like Abdo through strong policies and training, and by changing the PC culture of fear. The military has become uncomfortable identifying and dealing with possible Islamists within its ranks out of fear of the political gaffe of racially profiling Muslims.

Fortunately, Pfc. Abdo was stopped before he killed innocents. Congress must demand an investigation before there is another incident, and insist this time on real solutions to the military’s PC culture. And military leaders must be courageous as the Obama administration’s PC fusillades continue to erode our readiness.

France: in one decade, the number of mosques increased from 1000 to 2000

2011-08-06T08:56:00.000-07:00

Via AFP (French):

100-150 mosques are currently being built in France, the president of the French Council of the Muslim Faith, Mohammed Moussaoui, told RTL. Moussaoui said that most are financed by the worshipers and very few from abroad.

The interior minister, Claude Guéant, said three months ago that in the past decade the number of mosques increased from 1000 to 2000. Guéant wants to stop Friday prayers in the streets.

According to Moussaoui, 17-23% of French Muslims go to Friday prayers, which he says distinguishes between the practicing and non-practicing Muslims. He repeated that prayers in the streets were outrageous, but stemmed from lack of places in mosques.

According to a senior official, there are 17 mosques in Paris, all filled up, and they can't accommodate more than 13,000 people, which is clearly insufficient.

Sarkozy, the Dhimmi SLAVE of Caliph Hussein Obama, the false Conservative like Cameron, helped an evil Muslim dictator to take power in oil-rich Ivory Coast - and Muslims are praying arrogantly on the street in Paris! Thus, what can we expect from such a stupid French judge! The Muslim terrorists don't have to attack Europe from outside, they alraedy are conquering Europe - ancient Judeo-Christian Macedonia is next after Norway, Germany and Sweden; all with the help of the Left-Labour-Socialist traitors!

Srdja Trifkovic and the Oslo Bomber

2011-08-02T13:16:00.000-07:00

The Oslo Fallout: A Review of Views Unfit to Print

by Srdja Trifkovic • August 1st, 2011 • Related • Filed Under

[Subscribe online to Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. Click here for details].

On August 1 The Daily Mail published an op-ed by Melanie Philips (“Hatred, smears and the liberals hell-bent on bullying millions of us into silence”) which warns that the baleful effects of Anders Breivik’s recent attacks in Norway have not been limited to the carnage of the day. The atrocity has produced a reaction on the political Left in Britain, Europe and the U.S., she says, that is in itself shocking and terrifying.

Philips singles out former Norwegian prime minister and current chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize committee Thorbjorn Jagland, who has warned British Prime Minister David Cameron and other European political leaders to refrain from criticizing multiculturalism. In her view, to connect Breivik’s so-called manifesto—a rambling compendium of quotes against mass immigration, multiculturalism and Islamization—with criticism of the multicultural experiment itself, is “simply grotesque”:

First and foremost, this is treating Breivik as if his words deserve to be taken seriously and at face value. As of now, however, we don’t know whether Breivik is psychotic, a psychopath or under the influence of all the drugs he claims to have taken.
We also don’t know what part, if any, his political views actually played in this atrocity. After all, since his target was his country’s Labour party one might just as well surmise that he was motivated by hatred of his father, who was a Labour party supporter and who was divorced from Breivik’s mother when the killer was a baby.
In any event, someone who travels to a teenagers’ summer camp and invites them all to gather round so that he can kill them all cannot be considered rational. Yet the former Norwegian premier is treating Breivik as if he is a political terrorist whose words have the authority of a sane and coherent creed.

Even if he was motivated by hostility to multiculturalism and Islam, the author concludes, it is perverse to suggest that no one should write about these things because some deranged person raving about such ideas has run amok: “It’s a bit like saying no one should express concern about late abortions or animal cruelty because it leads straight to the firebombing of abortion clinics or animal-testing laboratories.”

On her own blog, also on August 1 (Fanaticism, mass murder and the left) Melanie Phillips points out that the relationship between the views approvingly quoted in Breivik’s ‘Manifesto’ and acts of terror is very different indeed from the relationship between Islamist radicalism and Islamic acts of terror:

The former is characterised by terrorism perpetrated in pursuit of discrete and limited aims. The latter aims to effect an apocalypse in order to bring about the perfection of the world. The former may be appalling in its effects but is nevertheless fundamentally rational since its goal, however noxious, is achievable. The latter is fundamentally irrational since its goal is a utopian fantasy. Consequently those who are in the grip of millenarian apocalyptic fantasies tend to be lunatics or psychopaths; and so it is as ridiculous to ascribe the pathologically murderous behaviour of Breivik to political rage as it would be to do so in the case of Stalin, Hitler or Ahmadinejad… [Militantly secular leftists] are in the same mould as the religious and political totalitarian tyrannies of the past; they make in this respect common cause with the Islamists whose agenda poses a mortal threat to their own lives and liberties and most cherished beliefs; and they share the characteristic of a closed thought system which is totally impervious to reason…

That is, in her opinion, why the left seized upon the Norway atrocity with demented joy and detonated a terrifying eruption of distortion and demonization, irrationality, hatred and sheer blood-lust as it saw in the ravings of Anders Behring Breivik the mother and father of all smears which it could use to crush those who refuse to surrender to cultural totalitarianism:

So those of us who fight for life, liberty and western civilisation against their enemies found ourselves—and by implication, the many millions who share these mainstream views—grotesquely damned as accessories to mass murder by those who actually cheer on religious fascists and genocidal madmen and who are set upon silencing all who resist.

In a similar vein Human Events commentator Rachel Marsden notes that Breivik’s outrage prompted media reports world calling it a sign of far-right extremism sweeping Europe. Meanwhile, back in America, a Muslim soldier, Naser Abdo, was arrested for planning a terrorist attack on Texas’ Fort Hood military base where Major Nidal Hasan murdered 13 people in 2009—and yet we are not hearing the same concern about attacks by all these people of a certain common cultural and religious background:

Despite what the media says, far-right extremism isn’t significantly on the rise in Europe. People can be legitimately frustrated with imposed societal reengineering by leftists and want to conserve the social and cultural cohesion that has traditionally made Europe a nice place to live without being considered extreme. To suggest that increased support for legitimate parties is extreme or dangerous is nothing more than an attempt to stigmatize real and valid concerns.

Marsden quotes a statement by the European Network Against Racism (ENAR) which claims that the Oslo killings “dreadfully demonstrate that extreme-right ideologies are a danger for the whole society and not only for minorities. Anyone can become victim to the violence of extreme-right fanatics, intent on wiping out diversity from our societies.” ENAR would have us believe, she notes, that it’s a steep, slippery slope indeed from, say, controlling illegal immigration of Roma gypsies to literally “wiping out diversity”:

I have a question for ENAR: How many violent acts by people of an ideology or origin must be committed before it’s considered a disturbing trend? Because it would seem from this statement that it only takes one. Why aren’t they at least equally concerned by the rampant violent acts committed by people from the same “minority” groups they cite?

A Danish psychologist, Nicolai Sennels, offered an answer on The Gates of Vienna. Breivik claims that he found inspiration for his massacre in blogs focusing on Islam and Muslim immigration, Sennels writes, but his true inspiration was the Lashkar-e-Taiba attack in Mumbai and Al-Qaeda’s massacres around the world:

No wonder that so many newspapers initially stated that Norway had been hit by Islamists. And no wonder that Islamists were the only ones to call the tragedy “good news”. Breivik’s interpretation of the Islam-critical blogs that he mentions in his manifesto is just as subjective and just as much a misunderstanding as the democratic and peaceful Muslims’ interpretation of their own religion.

That much-maligned American site’s own commentator (July 31) stresses that it is ludicrous to be blamed for a lone barbarian’s “research”, but that is exactly what the Left must needs do—when the prospect of accepting responsibility for what your culture produces is too terrifying, then you must find scapegoats to relieve your own anxiety:

With the imposition of the EU “Constitution” on member states, free speech among the citizens of that sad failure is greatly imperiled. The elites have granted you the right to say and think whatever they approve. The idea that free speech is inherent in the dignity of the individual is being systematically destroyed in favor of the collective mind, a collective whose rules are written by the oligarchs currently in power in the EU. You are no longer permitted to live and move and have your being outside their pre-approved strictures. Many of our European friends are understandably scared for themselves and for their countries. I can’t say that I blame them. The boundaries of their homelands are blurring, the doors out of the gilded cage of the nanny state are quietly closing, one by one. We grieve with you. We see our own Gramscians attempting the same thing in our country, too. Will they win? It’s hard to say at this point. The Founding Ideals, of free speech and individual dignity, are under fierce attack here also.

They are indeed, and Diana West, writing in The Brussels Journal, identifies The New York Times as a key player in the swift-moving drive to limit free speech about Islamization in the West. She points out the manner in which the paper initially published and subsequently omitted a report of Breivik’s lawyer stating that his client’s attack was directed against the Norwegian the Labor Party, not Muslim immigrants. The paper’s theme is one of Muslim aggrievement, even though most of Breivik’s victims were non-Muslim. Such aggrievement, however, fits the Times’anti-anti-jihad narrative to date, also dovetailing with machinations on the Left:

Forgive my cynicism, but I don’t see how else to interpret the omission of highly relevant news, the projection of Muslim victimization, and the apparent elevation of a criminal lunatic’s pseudo-thesis to a means to silence “politically incorrect” critiques of Islam. Which is in itself a kind of tragedy. The cynics and manipulators, eager for political advantage, fail to see the attack for what it was: a shattering blow to all of civilized society.

Don Pelayo & the Mustard Seed

2011-08-02T07:19:00.000-07:00

How Don Pelayo Saved Catholic Spain

By Felipe Barandiaran

Don Pelayo's heroic spirit
attracted God's blessing.

Vastly outnumbered but armed with invincible faith, Don Pelayo's heroic spirit attracted God's blessing and changed the course of Spanish history.

One fascinating aspect of the Old Testament is God's interventions favoring those who do all they possibly can while facing overwhelming odds and counting on Him to do the impossible. As we read about David and Goliath, Gideon and the Battle of Jericho, the Maccabees and others, we have the impression that God actually dons armor and goes to battle on their side. New Testament history counts a number of such interventions. Among these is the marvelous story of the Reconquista, or recapture of Spain from Islamic domination.

Jihad

Less than seventy years after the death of Mohammed in 632, his followers had already conquered most of the Middle East and North Africa. In the beginning of the eighth century, the leaders of the new religion turned their eyes to Christian Europe, dreaming of new Moorish conquests.

On the other side of the Strait of Gibraltar, Visigoth Catholic Spain was in a state of decadence, undermined by the Arian heresy, steeped in vice, its army and people lax, and its leaders divided.

In 711, because of internal divisions, traitors informed the Muslims about the weak points along the Spanish southern coast. Not waiting for a second invitation, the Islamic army landed. The poison of treachery added to the ruthlessness of the scimitar conquered all of Spain in a few years.

But the Lord of Hosts had long prepared the Spanish David who would face the new Islamic Goliath.

A Warrior, a Cave and a Queen

The Cantabrian Range in northern Spain forms a natural fortress of lofty peaks, deep gorges, narrow valleys, steep cliffs and evergreen forests. This region ranks among the "Peaks of Europe" and was once the paradise of hermits, and the home of bears, mountain goats and soaring eagles. It is also known as the cradle of Catholic Spain, the starting point of our marvelous saga.

One day, around the year 718, a troublemaker clambered desperately up rocks and boulders fleeing from a young warrior intent on his capture. Suddenly, the pursued man dashed into a large cave and disappeared into its dark depth. Chasing after him, the warrior found the troublemaker clinging desperately to a venerable hermit. Beside the old man stood a small image of Mary Most Holy with the Infant Jesus in her arms. At the hermit's request, the warrior granted the troublemaker sanctuary and gave up the chase. "God will bless you for this, my friend," spoke the hermit.

The troublemaker's and the hermit's names perished with history, but the young warrior's name was Pelayo, a nobleman of royal lineage and fearless disposition. The cave is known to this day as Covadonga, and the little image of Mary venerated there as Our Lady of Covadonga, Deliverer and Queen of Spain.

Early Spain

In the beginning of the eighth century, Spain was ruled by the Visigoth King Vitiza, a man as insolent as he was corrupt. While still a prince, Vitiza murdered the Duke of Fáfila and exiled his son Pelayo.

After Vitiza died, his sons were unable to secure the throne because of their cruel father's unpopularity. Taking advantage of the chaos, the worthy Rodrigo, Duke of Bética, seized power and proclaimed himself king. At this, the supporters of Vitiza and his sons swore revenge. They sent messengers to Mohammed's followers across the Strait of Gibraltar in North Africa and revealed to them all the weak points along the Spanish southern coast.

Tariff bem Ziyad was the one chosen for the task by the shrewd Musa bem Nusayr, governor of Muslim Africa. Aided by yet another traitor, the Count of Olian, Lord of Gibraltar, then at odds with King Rodrigo, Ziyad won many successive battles in 711.

What began as a simple incursion became a full-blown war of conquest as many enemies of the Visigoth regime joined forces with Ziyad.

The Fateful Battle of Guadalete

Finally, King Rodrigo was able to gather an army of 100,000 ill-trained men and met the Muslims in Guadalete. In the heat of the battle, the supporters of Vitiza and his sons joined the invading Moors, and attacking from behind decided the day for Ziyad. King Rodrigo was killed and his body vanished. Centuries later his tomb was discovered in Portugal.

Pelayo Emerges

In that battle, Pelayo, whose father the Duke of Fáfila had been killed by Vitiza, also fought. After the defeat of Guadalete, Pelayo fled with family members to Asturias in northern Spain.

Meanwhile Nusayr grew jealous of Ziyad and decided to share in the glory and the spoils of conquering Spain. He crossed the Strait of Gibraltar with a powerful army and, with it, conquered Granada, Malaga, Merida, Seville and Zaragoza.

Continuing to join infamy to treachery, Vitiza's followers surrendered town after town to the invader. Like dominoes, region after region fell, leaving only a few towns free from Muslim domination in the Cantabrian region near the Pyrenees.

The Muslim Munuza was appointed governor of Gijón in this region and was to cross paths with Pelayo by falling in love with the Spaniard's sister. Pelayo opposed the match and was sent prisoner to the south of Spain. Evading his captors, he returned to his family to find Munuza planning a wedding. His opposition enraged the governor, who ordered his imprisonment.

The Resistance Begins

Warned by friends, Pelayo sought refuge in the mountains of the Cantabrian region and swore to resist the new regime. His natural leadership, his fame as a fearless warrior and his rank as a prince of royal lineage attracted many Catholics who wished to combat the invader. Around him gathered a force of about a thousand strong. Unanimously, they proclaimed Pelayo king in 716 or 718.

Tradition says that since the crimson flag of the Goths had disappeared in the fateful battle of Guadalete, the hermit who inhabited the cave of Covadonga placed in Pelayo's hand a wooden cross saying, "Behold the sign of victory." Pelayo positioned this cross at the top of his standard to be carried in battle.¹

Noticing that Islamic attention was now focused on trying to conquer France,2 Pelayo launched forays against Muslim strongholds obtaining successive victories.

Hearing of the insurrection, Munuza sent word to Alahor, the Emir of Córdoba, who in turn sent his lieutenant Alkama with a large force to crush the rebels. With him, Alkama brought Don Opas, the bishop of Seville, a relative of Pelayo and a Muslim collaborator, hoping that he might convince Pelayo to give up the impossible task. Meanwhile, Pelayo had distributed his small force throughout strategic positions of the Cantabrian Range while he, with a few men, took their positions inside the cave of Covadonga where the image of Mary Most Holy was venerated.

Interview with Bishop Opas

Before the battle, Alkama sent Bishop Opas to try to persuade Pelayo to put down his sword by promising pardon and many benefits. Bishop Opas is quoted as saying, "Brother, I am sure that you work in vain. What possible resistance can you put up when all of Spain and its armies could not resist the Islamites? Listen to me. Settle down, and enjoy your many possessions in peace with the Arabs like everyone else is doing."

Pelayo answered: "I want no friendship with the Islamites and will not be subject to their empire. Don't you know that the Church of God is like the moon that once eclipsed returns to her fullness? We trust in God's mercy and know that from this mountain will emerge the health of Spain. You with your brothers as well as Olian, minister of Satan, decided to give to these people the kingdom of the Goths. But we, having Our Lord Jesus Christ as our advocate before God the Father, despise this multitude of pagans in whose name you come. And by the intercession of the Mother of God, who is Mother of mercy, we believe that this small army of 105 Goths will multiply like seeds from a tiny grain of mustard."²

Realizing there was no compromise in Pelayo, Bishop Opas returned to the Muslim army and said, "Go on to the cave and fight because only the sword will obtain anything from him."

The Battle (718–722)

On that day, two different civilizations and religions faced each other. Islam, which had triumphed over the Middle East and North Africa, was now poised to crush the last stronghold of a ruined country, a destroyed civilization, an enslaved people and a profaned religion. There, at Covadonga, was to be decided whether Spain would be an extension of Islam or the spearhead of Christian Civilization.

As Pelayo and his men looked down from the cave of Covadonga they saw a massive Muslim horde. Alkama and his men jeered, sure of an easy victory. A chill of fear compounded the chill of the cave, but the indomitable leader, pointing to the small image of Our Lady of Covadonga, reminded his brave men to place all their confidence in her protection. This little Lady "beautiful as the moon, brilliant as the sun, terrible as an army in battle array,"³ could not disappoint their trust. Thus began that terrible, unequal fight.

At a signal from Alkama, a multitude of stones and arrows were hurled against the men in the cave. It was then that a wonderful thing happened. The acclaimed sixteenth-century Spanish historian, Father Juan de Mariana, describes the battle:

They fought at the entrance to the cave with all sorts of weapons, and a shower of stones. Then it was that God's power was manifest, favorable to ours and contrary to the Muslims because the arrows and spears that the enemy launched returned to them causing great harm among them. The enemy was astounded at such a miracle. Heartened and on fire with the hope of victory, the Christians emerged from the hideout, few in number, soiled and ragged, and engaged in a melee. They fell fiercely upon the enemy who, thrown off balance, turned and ran.⁴

Meanwhile, the other warriors, placed in strategic positions throughout the mountains, pushed down huge boulders and tree trunks on the Muslim army now trapped in the deep valleys of the region. Others shot their arrows. At the same time, a frightful storm broke out, which added to the panic, and caused the Muslims to flee in disarray. Pursued by the Christians, they were killed in the Cangas Valley in a terrible battle.

The traitorous Bishop Opas was taken prisoner, and Alkama was slain along with thousands of Muslims. The remaining Moorish army took flight only to be buried by a mountain close to the Deva River that suddenly fell upon them and drowned them in the river. For centuries after that, whenever the river swelled in winter, bones and parts of armor floated to the top.

Back in Gijón, on hearing of the astounding defeat, Munuza fled with his troops, only to be pursued by the Spaniards who caught up with him near Oviedo, killing him and his men.

Don Pelayo Began the Restoration of Spain

Encouraged by such a victory and Pelayo's example, an increasing number of Christians joined him. One of them was Alfonso, the son of the Duke of Viscaya, who left his father and his lands to join the fight at Pelayo's side. Alfonso later married the hero's daughter, Ormisinda, and at the premature death of Pelayo's son Fávila, became King Alfonso I the Catholic.

Rather than establishing his court in Gijón, the most important city of Asturias, Don Pelayo chose Cangas de Onis, in the region of the "Peaks of Europe," since it was a more defensible position.

Pelayo did not enjoy much peace. He neither sought it nor could he expect it from the Muslims. He spent the rest of his life battling the Moorish invader. He died from natural causes in Cangas de Onis in 737 and was buried by his wife Gaudiosa near the altar of Our Lady in the Cave of Covadonga. The epitaph on his tomb reads:

Here lies the holy king Don Pelayo,
elected in the year 716, who in this
miraculous cave began the
restoration of Spain…

Australia: Male Prostitute Gets the Red Carpet Treatment

2011-08-01T17:41:00.000-07:00

Brokeback Princeling

A MAN who claims to have been paid for sex by a Saudi prince has escaped immediate deportation because he fears he will be persecuted for being homosexual.

The Refugee Review Tribunal has been ordered to reconsider giving a visa to the man, who cannot be named, after first rejecting his tale of huge payments and months of secret royal liaisons.

Homosexuality is banned in Saudi Arabia and men have been jailed, lashed and reportedly executed.

The man has applied for a protection visa, claiming that because of his sexuality he fears his family's wrath and persecution from his community in Lebanon.

Court documents say that the man said he left his boyfriend in 2008 and travelled to Saudi Arabia because "the Saudi prince liked him very much". He said the prince arranged a visa and paid for his travel and they had sex "in return for financial and material support".

But the deal went sour when the man was booted from the country after he was sprung having an affair with a friend of the prince.

The man fled to Melbourne where he frequented gay nightclubs.

Evidence tendered on his behalf included a reference from the prince, which his lawyers said showed that "he loved (the man) so much".

But the Immigration Department found the man's claims to fear persecution in Lebanon were undermined by "multiple inconsistencies" in his evidence about his employment, his first homosexual relationship and his circumstances just before his travel to Saudi Arabia.

The tribunal also doubted the man's allegations, refusing to accept that he "was in a homosexual relationship with the prince or one of his friends". It even doubted the man was gay.

But the Federal Magistrates' Court ruled the tribunal erred in its decision to deny the man a visa because it failed to raise its doubts about his sexuality and affair with the prince during its questioning.

Ramadan Offerings From the Religion of Peace

2011-08-01T17:10:00.001-07:00

Posted on August 1, 2011 by sheik yermami

This is one seriously sick religion:

Muslim rapes Christian Toddler for Failure to Convert to Islam

When Neeha’s father, a Christian, refused to convert to Islam his 2 year old daughter was kidnapped and mercilessly raped in a field. (source)

Good News: 20 % of Muslims in France Do Not Fast at All!

(ANSAmed) – PARIS, AUGUST 1 – The number of Muslims in France who respect the Ramadan fast is growing, young people most of all. Ramadan started today at dawn.

”Migrant Protests” in Italy

Italy: Bari, 1 Aug. (AKI) - Around 35 people were injured Monday in southern Italy when people held in a migrant detention camp near the city of Bar staged a protest that turned into a riot.

‘No God But Allah’:

Open Season on Egypt’s Copts…

“They were chanting, ‘There is no god but Allah.’ They wanted me to convert to Islam,” Mitri says. “… I was on my knees with my hands over my head. It felt like icicles falling on my body, and I prayed.” An attacker slashed his back, an arm and a cheek with a box cutter before slicing off his right ear.

Afterward, a caller told police: “We took our Islamic justice; you can now take your civilian justice.”

China Jihad

“A group of religious extremists led by culprits trained in overseas terrorist camps were behind the weekend attack,” a Kashgar government statement said. (source)

WTF? Rugby League Goes Islamic?

Cowboy Cory finds Islam

Khoder Nasser, a devout Muslim who was instrumental in Anthony Mundine’s conversion a decade ago, converted COWBOYS back-rower Cory Paterson to Islam. Paterson is participating in the ramadan fast…… (what a sucker!)

The Far Side

2011-08-01T16:32:00.000-07:00

She can read!

WATCHSheila Jackson Lee Will ‘Read Entire Debt Bill’ to Determine ‘If There is Justice for All’

To some Democrats the bill is a "sugar coated Satan sandwich."

338 Comments »

People like that scream the loudest when you use the 'N'-word. But they themselves make sure they remain on the 'N' level and below:

America is Biggest Terrorist in The World & Army Navy & Marines Only Kill People.
Rapper Motivates Youth By Proclaiming America is ‘Biggest Terrorist in The World” (Video)

Report: Obama Lacks Presidential Skills – “A Plumber Would Be More Qualified” Than Obama

If there’s one thing the debt crisis uncovered, it’s that Obama makes an awful leader. The media is even admitting that a plumber would have better skills to lead the country than Obama.

This time Guam will tip!

(CNSNews.com) — Congressman Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) has claimed that “Tea Partiers” have enacted a “plan to dismantle the American government” and in the process, the country has lost its “moral compass.”

Extortionists

(The Hill) — Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) on Monday said that he would be voting against the debt-ceiling increase deal saying it was “gained by extortion and a weak defense.”

Sheik yer’mami down but not out!

2011-08-01T16:10:00.000-07:00

Posted on August 1, 2011 by sheik yermami

Our host has taken the site down due to constant overloads, which caused other sites to crash. We were running out of bandwidth! Its nice to be popular, and we appreciate the increasing interest from our regular readers and the wider community.

I will be posting here and on Vlad Tepes site till Winds of Jihad is back up. I was told it could be up to 24 hours to be back online.

We will do whatever it takes to bring the counter-jihad to the worldwide community of infidels, because we must. We cannot afford to lose this war against the global jihad, a war which was declared on us in the 7th century, not the other way around.

Islam has destroyed many cultures and civilizations because people were deceived into believing that a peaceful coexistence is possible. The depredations of dhimmitude and chastened subservience however make that impossible. Islam seeks domination by all and any means and does not grant Christians, Jews, Buddhists or Hindus equal rights, they are unbelievers who must be forcibly converted or killed. This is now self-evident in all the lands where Muslims have the upper hand.

To give in to their demands would dishonor our ancestors who fought valiantly to keep our countries free of the Islamic scourge. Our children will never forgive us for being such cowards in the face of such an implacable enemy.

You must remember that it is not our words, but the silence about the dangers of Islam which has the most negative influence on our societies. Feeding the crocodile will not keep us safe, and the appeasers will follow the quislings down the memory hole.

Unfortunately, due to our popularity, we now have to pay a whole lot more to get our message out. I hope that those of you who appreciate what we’re doing will chip in to keep us going. So far we never had a fundraiser, but every little bit helps. Yes, we do take credit cards and we do have a PayPal account.

FYI: We also have an emergency site, called Moe’s Jihad News, where I will post the most relevant updates while the main site is down.

In closing, I’ll post the most cheerful message I have seen for a long time, from the most courageous freedom fighter I ever had the pleasure to call my friend, Robert Spencer:

Victory is in sight

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” -- Mahatma Gandhi

We have no money. We have no powerful friends. We have no media connections. We have no resources.

All we have is the truth. And that means that victory is assured.

Oslo Mayor Absolves Muslims of Future Terrorist Attacks

2011-07-27T13:21:00.000-07:00

Preemptive Dhimmitude

"The murderer was white, Christian for all I know, a little younger than me and very similar in appearance. None of you have branded me as a possible murderer. If a Muslim ever does something that can't be accepted, I promise I'll never brand you," Mayor Fabian Stang told the assembled.

These weasels are beneath contempt.
Oslo: Mosque holds memorial ceremony for terror victims (Islam in Europe)

Winds of Jihad under attack

2011-07-27T11:54:00.000-07:00

Our enemies use hackers, spambots & DOS attacks to take us down. The site has been overloaded and out of service for the last 30 minutes now and I'm trying to get it back up.

Please bear with us.....

While We Were Sleeping, The Global Muslim Brotherhood & Civilizational Jihad Came To America

2011-04-26T16:19:00.000-07:00

(Source)

“How long will you sleep, O sluggard?

When will you arise out of your sleep?

Yet a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to lie down and sleep--

So will your poverty come like a robber or one who travels (with slowly but surely approaching steps) and your want like an armed man (making you helpless).”

Proverbs 6:9-11 (Amplified Bible)

Egypt is in chaos; and it is important to note that the faction which ends up with the power in this Mideast nation will affect the region, the future of Israel and the rest of the world.

One of the many dissenting groups participating in the demonstrations within Egypt is theMuslim Brotherhood.

A CNN anchor recently framed a question to Ahmed Osama, a member of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, in this way:

“I’m asking about the Muslim Brotherhood, the organization that has tirelessly, and in many cases quite courageously, campaigned in elections, it has campaigned against the government, it has campaigned on behalf of the poor in Egypt. It has a long, long history in that country. What role should it have now?”

You can view a video of the CNN anchor’s interview here.

Another reporter, Martin Fletcher of NBC, is apparently unsure of whether a government controlled by Islamic fundamentalists would be good or bad. Lisa Graas writes:

“One of NBC‘s top reporters in the Middle East, Martin Fletcher, tells his viewers that no one really knows if an Islamic fundamentalist government would be bad. He also offers scenarios of things that could happen, but does not note whether or not these things would be as a result of a legitimate democracy or of Islamic fundamentalism, leaving uninformed viewers with the impression that either might be just as good as the other.”

The positive spin put forth by the CNN anchor regarding the Muslim Brotherhood and the indecisive statement by one of NBC’s top reporters about Islamic fundamentalism should be of concern to all.

Why? Consider the following excerpt from a document written by Mohamed Akram of the Muslim Brotherhood entitled An Explanatory Memorandum, On the General Strategic Goal for the Group In North America -- 5/22/1991 (Click on link to view the document — an English translation begins on page 15). Along with other documents, this “memorandum” was submitted as evidence during a 2007 trial in which an Islamic charity, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, was charged with giving aid to Hamas, a terrorist organization. It sets a clear path by which the Muslim Brotherhood would work to destroy America from within. Again, from that “memorandum”:

“The primary strategic concept to accomplish the Global Muslim Brotherhood’s objective is “civilizational jihad,” the usurpation and replacement of American Judeo-Christian and Western liberal social, political and religious foundations by Islam. The campaign plan is one of colonization, described by the Ikhwan as a “settlement strategy.”

“The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is not escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack.”

Do you know that the stated goal of the Global Muslim Brotherhood is to implement Sharia Law in every nation, forming an Islamic global state? Do you understand that it is an honor for a Muslim to lie to an infidel? Do you realize that, to them, every non-Muslim is an infidel? And most importantly, have you noticed that it is common to read that many Muslim organizations in the United States are linked openly with the Global Muslim Brotherhood?

We clearly are not saying here that every Muslim is radical. We are not saying that every Muslim seeks to undermine the U.S. Constitution. We acknowledge there are moderate Muslims to be found in our nation. However, we are saying that there is a sizable, well-funded, identifiable faction of Islam which has as its intention to conquer America from within through civilizational jihad. The strength and scope of the influence of this extremist faction through violence in other parts of the world exposes the truth that the power which the radical Islamists wield over moderate Muslims is formidable. And the silence of the moderate Muslims in condemning the violence of the radicals is deafening.

And although the Muslim Brotherhood will talk about democracy, we must not be ignorant of the fact that the democracy of Islam does not include individual freedoms nor the rule of law, apart from the rule of Sharia Law. Democracy for the Muslim Brotherhood involves conditioning and control of the people versus life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Following is an excerpt from a Review Essay by David Bukay from the Middle East Quarterly:

“The Islamic world is not ready to absorb the basic values of modernism and democracy. Leadership remains the prerogative of the ruling elite. Arab and Islamic leadership are patrimonial, coercive, and authoritarian. Such basic principles as sovereignty, legitimacy, political participation and pluralism, and those individual rights and freedoms inherent in democracy do not exist in a system where Islam is the ultimate source of law.”

And for those who may be unfamiliar with the Islamic law of Sharia, we think Joy Brighton gives a clear explanation of the goal of Sharia. Ms. Brighton is a Sharia financial expert and in her words:

“Sharia’s mission is to force conversion of the entire world to Sharia-driven Islam where state and church become one.”

The Central Illinois 9-12 Project previously posted an article -- Shorebank, Sharia Law and Bank Bailouts -- which included this excellent video narrated by Joy Brighton.

Many citizens and leaders across America have come to the faulty and dangerous conclusion that as long as adherents to Islam are peaceful, and not violent, we as a nation are in no danger and can live in ecumenical harmony with one another. In our opinion, they could not be more wrong.

We want to begin to refocus the conversation by bringing to the forefront of the debate one very simple question:

What makes **it okay to do the following peacefully, or otherwise?**

Further, in our opinion, the work of …

“eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions“…

is treason. Treason by definition is: the offense of attempting to overthrow the government of one’s country or of assisting its enemies in war.

As protests from Tunsia to Egypt occur, the Muslim Brotherhood is gaining a stronger foothold across the region. Should the Muslim Brotherhood come to power in Egypt, it could embolden and encourage the uprising of radical Muslims in other nations, including the United States.

We who value our national heritage and the Constitution must pour the Kool-Aid down the drain, wake up to the fact that civilizational jihad has come to our shores and face the reality of present circumstances within our borders and across the globe.

We must immediately begin to frame the debate of the spread of Islam across our nation away from the flawed premise of freedom of religion. We must sharply focus the debate around the issue of the totalitarian ideology of Islam and its ever-growing influence across the globe through the aggressive acts of terrorism and through the passive act of the implementation of Sharia Law. Leaving this debate in the hands of the pundits will only deliver the same result. Islam’s goal of civilizational jihad advances, while the pundits bloviate and the nation sleeps. We must lay hold of this debate and awaken a sleeping America to the reality of the civilizational jihad being unrelentingly waged by radical Muslims.

We must take the lead in shaping the true debate for our nation, whether it is the question of whom we will stand with in regard to world events such as the demonstrations in Egypt or how we deal with the spread of Islam in America — because it is becoming clear the Muslim Brotherhood has learned very well the lesson of never letting a crisis go to waste.

This debate is not about building another mosque. This debate is not about burning a copy of the Quran. It is about the systematic takeover of our nation through a planned colonization, and we have every right to defend ourselves against this civilizational jihad. If we do not turn the tide of the onslaught now, the United States may soon find itself facing a situation similar to that of France. As one Frenchman stated: “We expected Islam to adapt to France and now it’s France adapting itself to Islam.” Or even worse, we may see here in America -- as it is in Egypt today -- open demonstrations fueled by the radical forces of Islam.

Wisdom calls our nation out of slumber. Wisdom calls our nation to boldly and honestly face the rising tide of influence of the Muslim Brotherhood. And wisdom calls our nation to lead in righteousness and justice in order that the bright light of a city on a hill may continue to be seen by all and serve as a beacon of hope to every other nation.

The Real Problem is Israel

2011-03-24T19:22:00.000-07:00

I mean it. Jews are their own worst problem. Stop apologizing for being the only civilization in the ME!

Jew-Hatred Run Amok: UNHRC to vote on six anti-Israel resolutions

I look forward to the next President of the United States withdrawing from the UN and tying any and all contributions to results and performance. Because this is beyond the pale. The slaughter of non-Muslims in Muslim countries, the honor killings, slavery, gender apartheid, and the mindless slaughter of their own people in Libya, Iran, Somalia, etc., is proof enough that they ought to be expelled from the the "democratic" world body -- let alone sit on the a "human rights council," no less.

And here we are, once again, punishing and marginalizing the shining beacon of medicine, technology, education, benevolence and humanity in the most hellish region on earth, Israel. What a world.

And Obama defers to these animals. He is part of the problem.

UNHRC to vote on six anti-Israel resolutions JPost via Atlas

From the Religion of Peace:

A Tale of Two Babies

An Israeli paramedic team watches Palestinians celebrate the murder of Jewish children, then save Arab lives in the very settlement where the victims lived. (FrontPage Magazine)

'They Kill Us and We Build"

An interview with the extraordinary 12-year-old surviving daughter of the Itamar family massacre. (Elder of Ziyon)

What Israel Knows about Hamas (American Thinker)

If Hamas shares the "same ideological source material, the same methods of terror and martyrdom to advance their agenda, and the same ambitions" as al-Qaeda then why should they be looked at any

Sharia & Taqiyya

2011-03-19T23:47:00.000-07:00

From the The Tundra Tabloids’ friend and colleague, Sam Solomon, an apostate from Islam and scholar of sharia law would greatly disagree with the above propagandist. KGS

Replacing the Natives with a Mohammedan Proletariat

2010-12-20T02:25:00.000-08:00

Eurabia: The Planned Islamization of Europe

“Europe is not occupied by any external force, but in spite of this fact the continent finds itself in the throes of one of the greatest demographic upheavals in its history…”

The following analysis of the Islamization of Europe was written by Michael Mannheimer in 2009 and originally published in German at the Bürgerbewegung Pax Europa website.

The translation below was adapted from a pdf document. Since the original has both footnotes and endnotes, I have taken the footnotes and converted them into endnotes with a different sequence, based on lower-case letters enclosed in square brackets (example: ^[a])

Eurabia: The Planned Islamization of Europe
by Michael Mannheimer

“Thanks to your democratic laws, we will overtake you; thanks to your religious laws, we will rule over you. — Imam from Izmir¹

The Example of Denmark

The Islamization of Europe is in full swing. The majority of Europeans are helpless against this development. They are informed neither about the true essence of Islam, nor about the background of Islamic politics on European soil. The Muslims have not come to integrate into European societies. Their goal is the transformation of Europe into an Islamic realm where Shari’a alone, the law of Islam, will rule.

This series of documents brings important information to light with regard to this issue with the hope that the expansionist desires of the Muslims and their supporters in the Western Elite will be met with much-needed resistance.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Part 1: The Political, Ideological and Religious Background Behind the Islamization of Europe

The Plan of the Left for Islamization

— and its persistent realization to this day

At the beginning of the 1990s, the representative from Bündnis90/Die Grünen (Coalition90/Greenpeace) for German-French Europe and one of the leading leftwing politicians, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, announced accordingly the following:

“We, the Greens (Green Party), must strive to this end that as many foreigners as possible be brought to Germany. If they are in Germany, we must fight for their right to vote. Once we have achieved this, then we have the segment of voters we need to change this republic.”

Jürgen Trittin, Federal Minister for Environment, Natural Protection and Reactor Security under the chancellorship of Schröder (1998-2005), and then after October 2005 the Federal Minister for Consumer Protection, Nutrition and Agriculture, has preserved his 1968 Peace Movement spirit [68er spirit] to this present day. Even today he is beholden to his prior membership in the Maoist “Communist Federation” (Kommunistischen Bund [KB]) (Their motto being: “Never again Germany!”). Regarding this, he says:

“This is no sin of the youth^[a]. I believe that there are even more things that a person can stand for to this day…”²

In the context of this declaration is Trittin’s interesting opinion regarding the concept of democratic elections.

They have not so much to do with the organization of parliamentarian majorities, but much more the attaining for oneself the power of

“dominant minorities and the leadership of opinion.”³

This is nothing short of post-Communist propagation of the Leninist Doctrine of a Dictatorship of the Proletariat on the part of a prominent German politician^[b]. That was the same Communist justification for decades-long oppression of their citizens through a radical, arrogant, and above all decidedly left-wing/Fascist minority. With that same strategy of opinion control that has been successful until now, Trittin has sketched out a much more penetrating plan regarding the real relationships of power among Western European countries. Even the political scientists have not been able to achieve this with their long-winded analyses. It is true that parliamentary power lies mostly in the hands of the conservative parties in Europe. However, the leadership of opinion of which Trittin speaks, and the power that arises therefrom, has been overwhelmingly in the hands of highly-organized, primarily left-oriented minorities (Keyword: leftwing [fascist] opinion cartel) who still find themselves to be unchallenged regarding what is politically correct and what isn’t. We will come to speak more often of this.

Jilted Politicians Seek for Themselves Another People

How a political satire eventually becomes reality

Let us come to alpha-beast of the Greens (Greenpeace), the German Joschka Fischer, who was The long-time chief of his party and served previously as the German Foreign Minister. In his youth he was a militant enemy of his country, a police-fighter, RAF-sympathiser [RAF = Rote Armee Fraktion, “Red Army Fraction”, communist revolutionaries] and a hater of the Western system^[c]. He blew the same horn as his party-friend and fighting companion Cohn-Bendit. Fischer (“I discover more and more how much I have remained a Marxist.”) reveals the political intentions behind massive immigration in his book with the revealing title “Germany — The Risk” (1994). The content of this book was summed up in the “WELT” newspaper as follows:

“Germany must be hemmed in from without, and within she must be heterogenized by influx (of foreigners) or quasi “thinned out.”⁴

In plain language, the idea of a voter fraud of historical proportions was crafted, the result being a stealthily and carefully executed plan with a pre-determined result. In 1960 only 600,000 Muslims lived in all of Europe, today, however, there are already over 30 million, and the greatest mass immigration in the history of man continues unabated. Each year 1 million new Muslim immigrants stream into Europe. This is done legally through the reunification of families, the process of asylum, or they come as “political fugitives” from their Islamic countries where human rights are trodden underfoot. Ever and again they receive residency rights, more and more receiving European citizenship without having to accede to rudimentary skills of culture, education or employment necessary to cope with the requirements of high-tech European society.

But they haven’t come here to integrate into Western society. This is forbidden by their faith^[d] as well as their religious leaders who are highly organized and have long since held the real leadership over European muslims. Their primary political goal is to complete what their religion, what Allah has commanded: the rule over all “infidels” in this world. This is what it says in the Koran; this is what their prophet (Muhammad) also commands. And this is what every representative of Muslims strives for in every European country, regardless of what party they belong to.

World Domination is the principal goal of Islam

Whether it be Vural Öger^[e] (German-Turkish SPD-Representative), whether Boumediennes^[f] (former Algerian head of state), whether Izbetbegovic^[g] (Bosnian ex-president), whether Erbakan^[g] (former Turkish prime minister), or whether it be Ibrahim El-Zayat^[h], (President of the Islamic Fellowship in Germany): every one of them knows well the mandate for world conquest, and every one of them is applying every bit of power they have to accomplish this end.

Only Western do-gooders and the leftist elite insistently refuse to acknowledge the Islamic push for world dominance, for they naïvely follow the motto of do-gooders and good-willers who think that that which is not allowed to exist simply cannot exist. But let it be said to all who refuse to accept reality: the Muslim doesn’t care one iota what the non-Muslim thinks of him. What Islam entails, what it really means, every Muslim understands perfectly. To express it coarsely, Western ideals of morality or other values are considered rubbish. Khomeini, among others, formulated this idea unambiguously when he said

“The rule over the world is the end goal of Islam”⁵

This statement is confirmed by all who know Islam. The German-Syrian orientalist and Islamic scientist, Bassam Tibi, says in addition:

“Everywhere, in that place where Muslims live, Islam claims for itself the sole owner of validity (dissenting ideas are invalid).”⁶

Even the Chief of Police in Cologne — bound to the requirements of his office not to take positions — concluded soberly as a result of unhindered border openings and the high birth rate of Islamic people that the German State will be overtaken in 2030. Since Islam is striving for world dominance, it could come to a bloody civil war in Germany and Europe.⁷

His colleague in Vienna, Alfred Ellinger, President of the Association of Austrian Criminologists (Vereinigung österreichischer Kriminalisten), sees it the same way. In a comment regarding the state of Europe in connection with Islam, he writes:

“A Moslem has the duty to defend his territory against attacks from infidels and at the same time to destroy the world of the infidels to the end that Islam will rule the whole globe. Jihad comes to an end only when all people have either accepted the Islamic faith or have bowed to its authority. The border of Islam is the border of the world.”⁸

Also, the Turk Metin Kaplan — who is smiled upon as the “Caliph of Cologne,” founder of the militant Muslim organization “Caliph-State,” Hater of Jews and Israel, and a recognized fugitive (Asylbewerber) — proclaimed in countless sermons the creation of an “Islamic Theocracy Germany” and prophesied the imminent coming of Islamic world dominance.⁹ At the end of 2008, the Islamic scholar of Indian origin, T.K. Abdullah declared in an open presentation in Qatar the coming takeover of the world by Islam after Communism and Capitalism have finally failed.¹⁰

Adolf Hitler himself had only a marginal understanding of Islam, but he collaborated with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in order to build a death camp for the Jews living in Palestine. Nevertheless, he was able to grasp the Islamic charge of world dominance better than most modern educated Europeans can.

“If we had become Mohammedans, we would have owned the world today.”¹¹

Muslims everywhere are working toward the takeover of power, and neither an ostensible leftwing opinion or a Green opinion can hold them back. Muslim Coalition90/Grünen (Bündnis90/Greenpeace) politician Nargess Eskandari-Grünberg expressed this fact in an Education and Integration Caucus when a Frankfurt citizen complained about the overwhelming contingent of foreigners in his part of the city.

“Migration is a fact in Frankfurt. If that makes you uncomfortable, then you need to move somewhere else,”

she said.¹²

Eskandari-Grünberg, was born in 1965 in Tehran, and in 1985 she fled Iran as a political fugitive and was granted asylum in Germany.

How European Politicians Are Executing Policies Against Their Constituents with the Help of Muslim Voter Policy

The influence of Muslims in European daily politics and their political power have become overwhelming in the meantime. Remember Gerhard Schröder’s reelection bid (Audio Schröder: “Yes, I am a Marxist!”), which he barely won with a razor thin majority of votes. With the possible threat of a loss before his eyes, Schröder put his bets on the Turkish vote and promised that, under his watch, the way would be irrevocably cleared for the EU-membership of Islamic Turkey. This message was geared to the approximately 600,000 naturalized Islamic immigrants, the majority being of Turkish origin and on whom Schröder had placed his hopes. His approach was successful. Thanks to the Turkish-German voters who gave the majority of their votes to Schröder, the SPD and Greenpeace parties were able to garner a noteworthy mandate majority, an advantage of a mere 6,027 votes was just enough to get him reelected to the Chancellorship.¹³ This, however, was achieved against the will of the German people (which fact was kept silent), for without the votes of the naturalized Turkish-German immigrants, Schröder would have lost this election to the opposition by a margin of over half a million votes. Imagine this: politicians practicing politics against their own people. This is the very thing that Cohn-Bendit called for, and it is the implementation of the same plan all over Europe by the left-wing power cartel, which calls for the “thinning out” of the native Europeans proportion of the electorate. And now the fruit of this endeavor is starting to show.

The shifting around of population groups is by no means a novel invention. As a means of “non-military” final solution, this shift has been accomplished in foreign areas that were already occupied, or perhaps the conquered people had their original populations replaced over time by means of “gentler” methods of crowding out until the original population was no longer there. A fine example in recent history is North Cyprus. Occupied since 1974 by Turkey, hundreds of thousands of Anatolian mainland Turks have been placed there. The result today is that the relationship between Greek and Turkish Cypriots has shifted dramatically in favor of the erstwhile Turkish minority.

An example from Tibet: This giant, autonomous region of 1.2 million square kilometers (Germany area by comparison is only 350,000 square kilometers) came under Chinese occupation in the 1950s. Since then China has seen to it that millions of Chinese have moved to Tibet, so that in the meantime Tibetans have become the minority in their own land. In both of these cases the thing that holds true is that the redistribution of population groups was guided by the authority of the occupying power, and indeed the result was logically to the advantage of the ethnic group of that occupying power.

Europe, on the other hand, is not occupied by any external force, but in spite of this fact the continent finds itself in the throes of one of the greatest demographic upheavals in its history by means of new and mostly Muslim ethnic groups that are successfully replacing indigenous Europeans. This upheaval has been steered by Europe’s own politicians and was programmed long ago to stand against the interests and needs of native Europeans. Those politicians have neither asked their constituents for permission regarding this issue, nor do they react to the growing unrest of the European people, because such a mass immigration has led to the fact that Europe as the Europeans have known it is becoming less recognizable. In many places Europeans have become foreigners in their own lands, and from the beginning they have not wanted this large influx. This immigration policy carries with it all the signs of a totalitarian concept of rule from the political elite of Europe, and harkens back to the giant population shifts in the Soviet Union and Communist China under Stalin and Mao. These shifts were decided within the circle of a small political group, and were carried out without one single referendum by the indigenous people involved.

The plain and short: with regard to Europe, the left-wing/green power complex has been behaving for quite some time in certain essential political core areas (i.e. migration, EU expansion, citizenship) in a way that resembles an external occupation force. Since those who have been responsible for this mass immigration have been unable to win over their home-grown European voters to this political work, they have set out to cause the occupation of their own lands by millions of people with a foreign language, culture, and religion. Their intention, in the meantime, is to “thin out” the European portion of the population, and eventually to disempower them altogether.

This is nothing short of a new form of “ethnic cleansing.” Moreover, there are certain perverse warning signs: No controlling external occupying force, but rather a small and determined minority from within the indigenous population; this ruling minority will meanwhile and eventually in the long term exchange the current population for those who promise a stronger support of their policies.

The left-wing/green master plan is already producing the desired results. As an example, in Brussels, Milan and Oslo, the name “Mohammed” is now the most common name given to newborns. In England the traditionally most common name was “Jack.” However, in the meantime “Mohammed” has taken the lead. In 2004 in Holland, 56% of all the children and youth in the large cities were foreigners, most of them Muslim.

In Switzerland, the statistics for 2040 show that 76% the population will be Muslim, assuming the policies of this Alpine country do not change. According to an Austrian study, in 2051, every third Austrian pupil will be a Muslim. A study from the Islamic Archive in Soest (2006) regarding developments of the German population predicts that in 2045, the German population will stand at 51.72 million Muslims in contrast to only 45 million native Germans. A fact that has already been carefully calculated by the leading Muslim authorities for accomplishing the takeover of power in that most important country in Europe.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Part 2: Facts about the Islamization of Denmark

For decades Denmark has been one of the few worldwide examples of a truly peaceful community with a nearly perfectly functioning state social system. For Europe and for others, this little country has been the example to follow, for it has a strong environmental conscience, one of the best education systems, and a low crime rate. For decades this was the cornerstone of the liberal policies carried out by the Danish Social Democrats.

However, in the ’90s disenchantment began to settle in, in parallel with the sudden explosion of immigrants from Islamic countries. The Danes came to a shocking conclusion as to how many Muslims already were living in the most important cities, and just how little if any desire they really had to integrate into Danish society. On the contrary, it became more and more clear that the leaders of the Muslims were beginning to attack the lifestyle of the Danes, using ever sharper language to express their contempt for so-called “Western decadence.”

Only gradually and much too slowly did the Danes begin to comprehend that, with the Muslims, they had taken in a group that not only could not accept the core values of the Danes (belief in the freedom of the individual, freedom of speech, equality for women, tolerance for other ethnic groups) but also would attack those values with ever-increasing force. In the place of “Western decadence,” they would set up the archaic societal model of Islam, which they would institute over time in Denmark as the future and only model of faith and justice to be desired.

Also, in Denmark as in other “lands of war”^[j], Islam is working on a massive infiltration of the country with the goal in the meantime of making Denmark into an Islamic state. The Islamic Party of Denmark is already declaring an imminent takeover of power in Denmark. The central and single assignment of the party is eventually to make Denmark an Islamic state through the occupation of important positions by Muslims. Moreover, they have threatened that a “wrong” treatment of Muslim children will be met with the unleashing of unrest on the part of Muslims living there.

General Facts

Like many other Western lands, the Danes are having problems with riots fomented by the Muslim immigrants. And this has not been just since the publishing of the Mohammed cartoons in the Jyllands-Posten in September 2005. Already in November 1999, several dozen youths in the heavily Muslim district of Nørrebro rioted while police looked on and did nothing. The Muslims smashed about 100 picture windows, set automobiles on fire, and threw stones at the police. According to the police report, the riot took place because of a judgment that was handed down for the deportation of a Danish criminal of Turkish origin. Ercan Cicek was to be returned to Turkey after serving a 3-year sentence.¹⁴ We should remember the recent Muslim tumults in France that were similarly tied to Muslim criminals and in which thousands of automobiles were burned and destroyed, as well as public buses having fire bombs thrown at them, and police being shot up with shrapnel weapons. The message the Muslims sent, not only in Denmark and France, but to others was this: “We are the future rulers of this country!”

In the course of the week-long raging protests by the Muslims after the publishing of the Mohammed cartoons by the Danish daily Jyllands-Posten (the result of the uprisings: 140 dead and over 800 injured worldwide), Denmark was also criticized by other Western governments. Sean McCormack, a spokesman for the US State Department, as well as the British Foreign Minister Jack Straw characterized the cartoons as “injurious”. To every democracy belongs

“in addition to freedom of opinion, aspects such as the fostering of understanding and respect for minority rights.”¹⁵

McCormack meant by his critique that the Muslim minority in Denmark had allegedly been oppressed by the Danes. Since time immemorial, the Muslims have boasted of their ostensible tolerance of religious minorities. Murat Hofmann, a German Islam convert, educated jurist, former diplomat, and author of numerous books, describes Islamic minority rights as

“the most liberal statute for other faiths that the world to this day has ever seen or used as a standard,”¹⁶

one of the many myths about Islam that doesn’t hold up when scrutinized more closely. Let’s look at an example from Denmark as to just how Islam really deals with non-Muslim minorities.

Because of Racist Muslims, Original Danish Natives Have to be Relocated¹⁷

The island of Greenland belongs to the little country Denmark. However, for years now, the native inhabitants of Greenland, the Kalaalit, do not have the confidence to go out into their streets anymore. The reason for this: the Muslims will throw rocks at them, or they regularly attack them in some other way. The reason for this is incomprehensible and at the same time surreal: many adherents to this “religion of peace” see the Greenland natives as “infidels” and even as wild beasts that have no human rights at all. And even though the Danish government has attempted by many means to improve the situation between the Kalaalit and the Muslims, no improvement has been achieved, and in may cases the situation has worsened. Among the actions taken by the Danish government was the creation of an Internet site in the Arabic language in which they attempted to show that in dealing with the Kalaalit, the Muslim were dealing not with beasts but really with people. Already in 2007, the yearly traditional festival of the Kalaalit in Aarhus (every June 21st) could only take place under the purview of police protection. And in 2008, the festival didn’t even happen, the result the increasing Muslim violence against the Greenland natives.¹⁸

This Danish Internet campaign in the Arabic language did not help the Kalaalit — even more Muslims are attacking them.¹⁹
Also, the natives have had to forego even their beloved football games, for the Muslims would throw rocks at them if the natives were caught practicing alone. The attacks have taken on such a great ferocity that the Kalaalit now barricade their windows in order to keep the Muslims from breaking into their flats. This problem has for some time already been known by the authorities, and they react just as any authorities in countries run by decent, unassuming people would react: instead of attacking the evil at the root, instead of arresting the perpetrators and putting them in jail, and instead of deporting them, the city council of Aarhus is financing the transfer to the Danish mainland for any Kalaalit who wishes to leave their homeland due to fear of the Muslims, and they are also subsidizing their search for flats outside of the large cities where the Muslim immigrants themselves have taken up residence. A step that the Muslims have already had in their sights, considering the exploding number of Muslims already in Denmark. Johanne Christiansen, one of the women from the Kalaalit group who gladly accepted the state assistance, says:

“I could not bear anymore being the constant target of their attacks.”

They have been exclusively attacked by Somalis and Arabs. “They simply have no respect for us.” Moslems tell the Kalaalits that they should “completely urinate upon themselves because Denmark is their country.”²⁰

With the exception of one or two insignificant Danish local newspapers, the mainline European media have to this day remained silent regarding this issue. Much the opposite is happening, however; the Süddeutsche Zeitung, a leader in the suppression and denial of the “allegedly threatening Islamization” of Europe²¹, signifies on a regular basis that the few who are warning of the Islamization of Europe are in error, or are kooks or haters of foreigners, and they accuse them of mockery and malice.

And even the countless human rights organizations that would otherwise expose the slightest error committed by Western governments at worldwide information and protest campaigns have remained unusually quiet, and to this day they have not said one word in protest against these activities in Denmark. As with most Western journalists, artists, and intellectual individuals, the boldness of Western freedom and human rights activists consistently ends exactly where Islam begins. And this boldness mutates in the face of the dark determination of that theocratic totalitarianism, which threatens its critics and opponents with murder in order to get them to shrink away in cowardice and dishonesty, a totalitarianism that encourages its adherents not to shy away from committing murder to accomplish its goals.

In any case, a democratically elected administration that has been totally unable to protect its own native people from attacks by immigrants does not deserve to have the name “government.” The policy of relocating the Kalaalit is interpreted on the part of the Danish Muslims as exactly this: a further act of the successive subjugation of Denmark to the Islamic claims of lordship over that country — and as an indirect encouragement to the Muslims to continue their practice of terror that, so far, has been quite successful against the West.

The previously mentioned international criticism against Denmark because of their allegedly lacking respect for its Muslim minority is a farce, considering how much hate and lack of respect the Danish Muslims have demonstrated against their Danish native counterparts. This is scandalous when, in hindsight, we recognize how the rights of minorities in Islamic countries are actually implemented (or are actually not implemented)^[k]. Moreover, this shines a light on the lack of knowledge or complete ignorance within the highest political ranks about the true character of Islam, which in practically all of its countries simply heaps the rights of minorities into a pile of dirt, especially when those rights have to do with “infidels.” Of a truth, there is no other religion that is nearly as antagonistic towards minorities in this fashion as Islam is. SPIEGEL (one of the few publications that even dares to attempt some criticism regarding Islam, even though it does believe that a moderate Islam is not evil) reports: “Violence, terror and a growing influx of Islamists threaten oriental Christendom. In some countries the unloved minority already struggles for survival — or seeks salvation in flight”²²

Detailed Set of Facts

In the following section a few reports from Denmark will be presented with respect to the subject of Muslim immigrants.

1. High Social Expenditures for Muslims in Denmark

Direct immigration into the Danish social system

Contrary to the oft-repeated and differing opinions of the politicians, immigration into Denmark costs far more for the state than citizens have been told. A Danish think tank estimates these costs to be up to 50 milliard Krone (about 6.7 milliard Euros) per year. The study mentions even further that if a sudden cessation of this immigration were to occur (especially that of Muslim immigration), gigantic sums of money would be saved. Another study states that one out of two immigrants lacks the qualifications for even the least skilled positions — especially among those immigrating from the Islamic world. This problem of direct immigration into the social system of Denmark is one that follows the pattern of other European countries where large increases in immigration has been an issue. The media, on the other hand, give a politically and Islamically correct report regarding these issues.²³
Immigrants from the Third World

Most of them are Muslims from such countries as Turkey, Somalia, Pakistan, Lebanon and Iraq — they make up 5% of the population — but receive over 40% of the social expenditures.²⁴
The average per-capita contribution to taxes and GDP by immigrants in Denmark, 80 percent of which originate from Islamic countries, is 41% below that of the Danes.²⁵

2. the Extremely High Rate of Crime Among Muslims in Denmark

70 percent of all crimes in Copenhagen are committed by Muslims

In February 2009, the Danish psychologist Nicolai Sennels published a book with the title “Among Criminal Muslims. The Experiences of a Psychologist in Copenhagen.” His conclusion: “The integration of Muslims in European societies is impossible.”

Here is a segment of an interview with Nicolai Sennels:

“Everywhere, there are painful measures being taken to integrate Muslims into society, but all these efforts seem to be futile. According to the Danish police and the Bureau of Statistics, 70 percent of all crimes in the Danish capital were committed by Muslims. Our national bank published a short study that shows that each Muslim immigrant costs on average more than two million Krone (about €300,000) in state subsidies, the sole cause for this being their limited participation in the employment market. Aside from this, they receive further benefits from the social system for unemployment, for the cost of translators, special hours at school — whereby 64 percent of the children of Muslim parents still can’t read or write properly by the age of 10 — plus the cost of social workers and, of course, the cost of more police personnel.”²⁶

The book had consequences. Nicolai Sennels says,

“My comments led to a forbidden conclusion with threat of being fired if I didn’t change my conclusion. If one follows the Danish authorities, then one could say that the serious problems that Muslims have are caused by poverty, by the media, by the police, or by the Danes in general. What one absolutely is forbidden to do is: first to bring the cultural background of immigrants into the discussion, and second to point back to the personal responsibility of the immigrants to integrate into society.”²⁷
The statistics in Germany are identical to those of Denmark

Already at the end of 2002, the internationally famous historian Hans-Ulrich Wehler came to the same conclusion about the Muslims living in Germany. In an interview with “taz”:

“The Federal Republic (of Germany) doesn’t have a problem with foreigners; it has a problem with Turks. This Muslim diaspora is for all intents and purposes unable to integrate.”²⁸

The statistics agree with Wehler: At 5.4 percent, the criminal quotient of immigrants in Germany is twice that of the general population. Indeed the level for foreign youth lies at 12 percent. Around 30 percent of all murders, rapes and robberies (with injuries) are committed by foreigners. The figures for the general population, however, stand merely at around 10 percent. Those who commit the extreme crimes are above all youth from foreign families — for example, in Berlin only one German in five is a repeat offender.²⁹ What the authorities in Berlin will not say, however, is the actual degree of foreigners that take part in criminal activity in the German capital, for the real truth is that more than 80 percent of all felons in Berlin are of “non-German origin.”³⁰
Terror in the streets: more and more Danish are fleeing from their own cities³¹

Whether Denmark, France, Norway, Sweden or Holland, everywhere the same pictures of street wars between the Muslim immigrants and the police seem to appear. Such is the substance of reports from Danish newspapers that civil-war-like conditions exist in practically all of the large cities in the country, especially Copenhagen and Aarhus, Denmark’s second largest city. The media also report how, more and more, the native Danes are being threatened and tyrannized by the Muslim immigrants. Whole neighborhoods have been converted to quasi-Islamic territories and thereby declared as “no-go areas” for the native Danes. The young Muslims declared at a weekend riot in Aarhus that this was “their city.”³² Similar expressions can be heard in Holland, Belgium, England, France, Sweden, Germany and Austria. Danish police report how they are yelled at and spat upon by Muslim immigrants. In order to be politically correct, the mainstream media in Europe have remained silent regarding these inconceivable situations, thereby deceiving their readers about the true state of affairs in their countries.
Drastic drop in urban real estate prices

Amid all of this, the value of real estate in almost every Danish city has plummeted, while at the same time rural real estate prices have shot up to heights hitherto unheard of. The reason: whatever Dane can afford to do so will flee from the big city and look for a quieter and above all more peaceful plot of land. It is here that the Muslims are — still — to be found at a minimum. It is here that the riots occurring daily in the large cities can be felt at a minimum, for in the large cities war has been the rule for a long time now. Only a short while ago did the Copenhagen Post finally declare the Danish capital a “war zone.”³³
Mass rape as a new and hitherto unrecognized phenomenon

Muslims make up only 4 percent of Denmark’s 5.4 Million population, but they make up the majority of condemned rapists in the country; a burning political fact is that practically all female victims are non-Muslim (Christian). Most of the media remain silent about this out of fear or political unrest. Similar ratios are to be found in other categories of criminal activity.³⁴ As pertaining to mass rape of non-Muslim women, the same numbers are the case in Sweden and Norway as well.

3. Persecution of Christians and Jews in Denmark

The Church of Aarhus pays protection money

Since the summer of 2008, the church of the 2nd largest Danish city, Aarhus, has achieved at least a little peace. After Muslim rioters — especially in the multicultural nucleus of Gellerup, a suburb of Aarhus — repeatedly tyrannized the Christians, the church finally paid Muslim bodyguards to protect the church from vandalism and protect the churchgoers on the way to and from their cars. Up until now, this measure has had complete success, and the church reports their expenditure as a success in multicultural integration.³⁵
Arabs want to murder Jews in order to gain recognition among Muslims

What originally sounded like a bad joke turned out to be fatally serious: a Danish Muslim of Lebanese descent, Wissam Freijeh, 27, at the beginning of 2009 in the Danish township of Odense, attempted to murder two Jews in broad daylight. In a pedestrian shopping zone, he shot a number of times at both Jews who fortunately managed to survive the murder attempt and are now healing from their wounds at a specialist clinic. In the meantime, the Danish newspapers, among others, found out the following information about the criminal involved: he had already been cited in a Danish newspaper in 2004 as “wanting to improve recognition among immigrants in Denmark.” He perceived this to be the most important duty that he had. Aside from this, Lebanese women who would leave their husbands were also to be killed according to Islamic laws.

In connection to the near-death shooting of the two Jews, resourceful journalists have invented a new term, “sudden jihad syndrome,” in order to describe the immediate or sudden need of a Muslim to kill an “infidel.”³⁶
Danish Jews require police protection

Muslim violence threatens Denmark’s approximately 6,000 Jews who are having to depend more and more on police protection. Anti-Israel marches have been acted out in anti-Jewish street battles. One organization called Hizb ut-Tahrir openly calls for Muslims “to kill all Jews wherever they find them.”³⁷
Jewish pupils have to change schools because they are bullied by Muslims

In August 2001, the principal of the Rådmandsgade School in Copenhagen-Nørrebro (Denmark) suggested to Jewish children that they attend another school because he could no longer guarantee their security there. Jewish children had been mistreated before by the Muslim pupils who are in the majority there.³⁸

4. Refusal of Integration by Muslims in Denmark

Muslims remain more and more among themselves

With the increasing number of Muslim immigrants comes ever-increasing separation from the native Danish population. Muslims, as the surveys and statistics show, wish to have fewer and fewer dealings with the native Danes. A more recent survey shows that only 5 percent of young Muslim immigrants would be ready to marry a Dane.³⁹
Denmark: Muslim schools bully and beat up pupils

In Odense, the fourth largest city in Denmark at 190,000 inhabitants, there also live numerous Muslims, many of whom come from Somalia. There is a special school for their children, the ABC-Skol in Vollsmose. However, this school is a special kind of school, for at this school the rules governing the school are not Danish but rather Somalian. For example, if the children answer the questions from the teacher too slowly, or if they give a wrong answer, then they are publicly humiliated and beaten in their Islamic home, usually with a rod on a finger and sometimes even openly in the face. This is hard for a person in Danish Odense to accept, for this type of punishment in modern Danish classrooms is now the stuff of history books. However, the police are now dealing with the new cultural enrichment provided by the Muslim teachers. Schoolmaster Muhammed Farah had often been warned to put an end to the violence in his school. He simply cannot comprehend why everyone is so excited about his school. After all, violence in Islam is forbidden anyway, the schoolmaster says…⁴⁰
Forced marriages and murders “of honor” also in Denmark

Forced marriage — In Denmark, newborn daughters are promised to male cousins in the homeland (of the family), and then forced to marry them under threat of death. This is a problem not only in Denmark, but in other European countries where Muslims live.⁴¹
Denmark is capitulating to her Muslims

The Danes constantly experience civil-war-like conditions in their cities. The German journalist and critic of Islam, Udo Ulfkotte, writes about this:

In January 2008, after there had been great unrest in the Danish suburbs where Muslims are majority populations, and after young Muslims in the township of Nørrebro set schools, apartment buildings, automobiles, and garbage containers on fire as well as attacking police, firemen and sanitation personnel, the security authorities searched for the cause. The young people had no reason for their excessive behavior. When asked by the media what they wanted in order to put a stop to their violent excesses, they requested that the police no longer examine immigrants regarding the trafficking of illegal substances and weapons. It is no longer allowed that immigrants be examined on the basis of suspicion in “their” neighborhoods. The Danish police responded in kind to this in January 2008 — and put a moratorium on suspect examinations in Copenhagen neighborhoods such as Blågårds Plads and Folkets Park, hotspots for oriental drug traffickers. The written statement from the police authorities was also shown on the TV-2 News show under the headline “Police Change Tactics” in which they reported the pullout of the police from the Copenhagen’s immigrant-inhabited quarters.

Moreover, it is now no longer permitted for police cruisers to patrol the immigrant neighborhoods because the presence of security authorities might provoke the immigrant citizens to new rioting. From this time forth, the only security measures allowed in the immigrant neighborhoods will be just the local police stations.⁴²

5. Terrorist Assaults and Support of Terrorism From the Muslims

Danish Green Party Candidate calls for terrorist assaults against Danish soldiers

Imagine if a Chinese^[l] or American parliamentary representative were to call openly on the Taliban in Afghanistan to kill any Chinese or American soldier whenever the opportunity might arise.

Yet, this very thing is happening right now in Denmark. The Danish-Palestinian politician Asmaa Abdol-Hamid has called all her Muslim brothers to kill Danes wherever they might encounter them.⁴³ Abdol-Hamid, along with her family, came as a Palestinian fugitive to Denmark in 1986 where she and they were generously awarded asylum — and where she enjoyed a first-class education. After she worked as a social worker and a family counsellor she was elected in 2005 as representative in the city council of Odense for the left-alternative party Enhedslisten. The political activity of Mrs. Asmaa Abdol-Hamid is considered in Denmark to be a “successful example of prosperous integration” and as “cultural enrichment.” Now, this is the same person that has called for terror attacks against Danish soldiers in Iraq. German and other European newspapers have remained most extremely quiet about the call for attack from this successfully integrated “Danish lady.”

After confirming her call for the murder of Danish soldiers in several subsequent interviews, one would assume that Abdol-Hamid would no longer be worth keeping as the poster candidate for the Greens. However, the opposite actually happened. The Greens, meanwhile, have actually increased their dependence on this famous associate who continues without restraint to promote Islam openly.⁴⁴
30,000 Dollars as Blood Money rewarded for each Dane slain

A 30,000 Dollar reward has been offered by a Muslim group in Denmark to anyone who kills a Jew in Denmark.⁴⁵
Hip-hop singer of Moroccan origin challenges incarcerated terrorist suspects to “stay the course”

Isam Bachiri is a Copenhagen-born Moroccan, a singer for the hip-hop band “Outlandish,” which was started in Denmark. The Danish media reports that Bachiri is supporting a 19-year-old Muslim incarcerated as a terror suspect in Denmark with money, clothing and ideological support. In numerous letters to the detainee are written challenges to “stay the course.”⁴⁶

6. And in Denmark the Muslims Want the Power

Copenhagen: Murder attempts against critics of Islam

On Sunday, 21 October 2007, the Danish organization SIAD — critics of Islam — had planned to demonstrate against the increasing Islamization of Europe. Before the protest began, out of nowhere leftwing individuals appeared, armed with iron rods, and their faces showing the intent to kill. The demonstrators were attacked by these individuals and were seriously injured. One of countless indicators that the leftists of Europe are ready to engage themselves — even to the point of inflicting death — in order to bring about the Islamization of Europe. Neither the Danish nor the German media reported anything about this documented occurrence.⁴⁷
Murder upon conversion to Christianity

Even in Denmark, Muslims who convert to Christianity must fear for their lives. Such a thing happened to a Kurdish woman living in Denmark. She received many death threats after she revealed why she had left Islam and converted to Christianity. Ever since her public declaration, she has had to hide in fear for her life.⁴⁸ Murder and threats of murder have for a long time been a successful means by Islam to keep its “umma” together and to prevent any possible internal criticism and solution to that criticism from happening. Internal and external terror — these are unmistakable signs of a religion with a license to kill, even a religion that is called “the religion of peace.”
The goal of an Islamic Denmark

Muslim leaders openly declare the institution of Islamic law as their goal — Shari’a — as soon as Denmark’s Muslim population has grown enough to enable it. This reality of this is not too far off in the future. One sociologist figures that if the current trends hold out, in 40 years 1 in 3 inhabitants of Denmark will be a Muslim.⁴⁹

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Part 3: The First Summary Regarding the Islamization of Denmark

Muslims want to rule Europe

The list of facts in connection with the Islamization of Denmark can be arranged in virtually any order. However, they mainly show three things:

First, when evaluating all immigrants coming into Denmark, it can be concluded that where criminal activity is connected to religion, the Muslim immigrants stand out the most.

Second, Muslim immigrants are in unrelenting pursuit of the takeover of power in Denmark. This will not be a normal transfer of government, as in normal democracies, but rather a complete transformation of this Christian Democratic country into an Islamic country under the laws of Shari’a — a Muslim Denmark. Muslims in all other European countries are pursuing this same goal where they now live as immigrants.^[m]

Third, it appears that Denmark’s Muslim problem is not limited to Denmark. Every Western country in which a notable Islamic diaspora lives has to battle with similar or identical problems. For Islam is no religion — and especially not a “religion of peace” — but rather totalitarianism with an unconditional claim to world dominance. All of this has been going on successfully for the past 1400 years under the disguise of “religion.”

What makes this so difficult to understand, among other things, is the giant vacuum of knowledge that non-Muslims have about Islam. Another problem is that a trusting and well-intentioned^[n] global citizen has difficulty accepting the idea that Islam could be such an exaggerated exception among the major world religions. Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Taoism may more or less have their problems, but at their heart they are mostly tolerant and peace-loving. Without exception they teach their believers that the good things they do in this life equip them for the next.

Indoctrination in Islam is Indoctrination into cadaver duty and the ruthless killing of “infidels”

Islam represents the exception: the capture of world dominance is the ultimate goal; all other goals must be subordinate. The Islamic ban of killing counts only for Muslims, not for “infidels.” Islamic peace will be achieved only by the fulfillment of Muslim world dominance; so the motto goes: When the whole world thinks and believes the according to the will of Islam, only then will peace reign in this world. Communism assumed an unrealistic image of man (in which they put forth the doctrine that all persons are equal) and failed as a result of this flawed perception. Moreover, Islam has an unrealistic image of man because it assumes that every person will eventually believe in one God — the Islamic God — and this image does not fit into to the infinite psychological, intellectual and creative diversity that is characteristic of every human being. The species called “man” is far more diverse, sophisticated, intelligent, creative, chaotic, and ultimately unpredictable than the archaic image of man given by the analphabetic^[o]-founded Islam. The “dar-al-Islam,” the Islamic concept of a future world, one in which all inhabitants are Muslim, is nothing more than an unrealistic — and even surrealist — Utopia that will never happen.^[p] However, as long as the Muslims strive for such a world and artificially divide our planet into “believers” and “infidels”, as long as they have this sense of a god-like charge for an eternal Jihad against the world of “infidels,” for this long the name Islam will be associated with war, terror and violence.

This continual war against non-Muslims — jihad — is declared by Islam as a religious and holy duty for every single Muslim. Audio from Khomeini:

“The Christians and Jews say, ‘you shall not kill’! But we say, that killing achieves the same value as a prayer when it is necessary!”

There’s more yet: Islam lures its contract killers with the alleged entry into Paradise where numerous dozens of virgins await the “jihadists,” and with whom they will enjoy sexual pleasures forever. And should a Muslim have problems with his conscience about the killing of an “infidel,” there is help and religious support directly from the Quran. In this passage they can read the redeeming words of their god, either before or after their act of murder:

“You are not the one who has slain them, rather Allah slew them. And you are not the one who has fired the shot, but rather Allah fired the shot, in order that He might show great grace from Himself.” Surah 8:17

To make it clear: their Islamic God, the “all-merciful”, not only expects his believers to kill off the “infidels,” but also he caringly provides the necessary therapy to deal directly with the situation. Their god has also seen to it that the sufferings of his hired killers will be kept in check by freeing them from all personal responsibility for their murders, and by taking that responsibility upon himself personally. One can observe this scenario from well-known mass murders in recent times (i.e. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot), where the State said: “You are not the one that did the killing; I, your State, am the killer. You are merely my instrument. When authority commands it (especially a god-like authority), it is seems easier to commit murder.

No other world religion has such a perfidious form of murder-culture; no other world religion schools their followers so systematically in how to kill innocent people of a different faith; no other world religion accepts such an outright devilish invention of general immunity for their believers so that they are free from the guilt of murder — and this is written in their “holy scriptures.” Getting to the point, if there really is a Satan, then the name of his religion is Islam, and his prophet is Muhammad.

Islam is therefore precisely the religious “worst case scenario” which normal citizens of the world can neither imagine nor acknowledge. Islam is the only world religion that educates its adherents from youngest childhood on up in the systematic and ruthless killing of non-Muslims. In 206 places (!) the Quran alone gives challenges for rape and murder against the infidels as well as the violent propagation of the faith. This fact alone regarding this “holy book” is what fundamentally distinguishes it from the holy books of the other remaining world religions. In 1800 further passages, their prophet Muhammad himself charges each Muslim to refer to the texts from Sunna and Hadith.

Conclusion: there are evil persons in every religion. But it takes a religion like Islam to make an evil person out of a good person.

The following fact cannot be repeated often enough: Europe has virtually no notable problems with Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish and Christian immigrants. The name of the European immigration problem is ‘Islam.’ In spite of this long indisputable fact, Muslim agents have a clever method for presenting the immigrant problem that they are causing: classify it as a “general problem with foreigners.” The facts however demonstrate very clearly: remove the Muslim statistics from the Danish crime statistics (and for that matter the other European countries’ statistics), and the immigration problem presents itself more amicably.

The notion of religious freedom is once again in great need of reconsideration. If the religious texts of a given religion, its internal foundations and/or the declarations of its prophets can so blatantly violate the unalienable human rights declaration of the UN, as is the case with Islam, then the status of “religion” must be removed by the highest courts. Otherwise any imaginable human injustice would be allowable and legitimized by law when it is committed in the name of “recognized religion,” and it would therefore be classified under the protection of “religious freedom.” Since this change of status isn’t happening, it is now high time for enlightenment to begin by means of international consensus (excluding, of course, Islamic countries).

It cannot and should not be permitted any longer for Islam to remove historically developed legal systems from power over the countries where they are already established, such as has been happening for a while now in most Western countries. Moreover, religious law must not be allowed to break constitutional law. In the future, it should be called this way:

Constitutional law breaks religious law!

No ifs, ands or buts.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Part 4: The Western Enablers of Denmark’s Islamization

Without the active support of Western intellectuals, pastors, politicians, artists, media personnel, authors and journalists, the Islamization of Europe would never be successful. The following chapter will show in particular what this support looks like.

Politicians as Enablers of Islamization

Copenhagen’s Integration Commissioner, Jacob Hougaard, called in all earnest to increase the visibility of Islam in all Danish schools and in places of employment, and to make the Islamic religion a solid component of public life in Denmark. Audio Hougaard:

“Islam must become a component of public life.”⁵⁰

He refined his challenge by effectively demanding general school vacation days occur on Islamic holidays, calling for separate bathrooms/washrooms for Muslims, and for a general honoring of the daily Islamic prayer times by private employers, and access to “halal”-slaughtered meat.⁵¹

Also, the previous Danish Foreign Minister and a liberal, Uffe Ellemann-Jensen, belongs to the party of appeasers. Ellemann-Jensen sharply criticized the publishing of the cartoons, and on 7 February 2006, he even called for the resignation of the chief editor of the Jyllands-Posten, Carsten Juste.

When the Polish Rzeczpospolita reprinted the Muhammad cartoons, they were promptly criticized by the Polish administration. Even more: Poland’s Foreign Minister Stefan Meller bent the knee unbidden and officially apologized for the reprint by an independent newspaper, in quick and early obedience to all Muslims in this world. Things like this always please the Muslims of the world because they expect nothing else from the non-Islamic part of the world but their collective subjugation under the Islam’s authoritative claims. After this, the chief editor of the monthly newspaper Wiez, Zbigniew Nosowski, followed up with this criticism of Poland’s government:

“This publication was a provocation that has been amplified by the additional media coverage. Journalistic provocations can be essentially useful when an uncomfortable truth cannot be disclosed by any other means. The only new information that came from the cartoons was … the level of ignorance concerning things religion.”

Here we see a typical Western Journalist who has arrogantly set himself up to speak eloquently of “provocation” and “ignorance in things Religion”, and in this he has proven that he has absolutely no understanding of the essence of Islam himself. You can’t just outdo his commentary; it bristles of ignorance, stupidity and arrogance.

It is a given that Turkish prime minister Erdogan would sharply criticize the cartoon publication. However what he didn’t indicate in his harsh criticism was that this was only a drop in the bucket compared to what he demanded from his party in 1997. As coauthor of his party’s manifest, he called for no less than the total annihilation of the Jews. That is the correct thing to do within the context of the Quran’s anti-Jewish contents, and Islamically correct according to the declarations of Muhammad. These things are not and will never be criticized by any Islamic association or leading Islamic theologian.

Media silence

Western “quality” media have kept Erdogan’s declaration silent to this day — a declaration that is not inferior to those of Hitler and Ahmadinejad. Coincidence? Not on your life. If the editors had been able to unearth such declarations by an American or Israeli president from their archives, then they would certainly have dominated the headlines of the world for weeks to come!

Erdogan’s monstrous call for genocide of the Jews of this World seems not to be worth a single headline for most of the media, but for Erdogan it also seems to pose no moral problem as well. On the other hand, exercise any criticism of his prophet Muhammad who challenged his followers many times to wipe out the Jews, and who himself had countless Jews killed, and this causes no small stir. It is well known that the murder of non-Muslims is allowed in Islam. However, the one who exposes this Islamic license to kill, the one who calls it by name and criticizes it, the same is regarded by Islam as an unforgivable offense to the prophets and the religion. That is the hierarchy and hypocrisy of the moral principles of this “religion of peace.”

I accuse the majority of the media of nothing less than complicity with the totalitarianism of Islam and with its most important political and spiritual leaders, whether intentional or unintentional. The reasons for this (often unintentional) complicity has three names:

Hate against the society of Western citizens
Anti-Americanism
Anti-Semitism

These, as well as total ignorance about the tenets and goals of Islam, are the essential portals between Islam and the greater portion of left-leaning Western intellectuals, whether they serve as publicists, media personnel, artists, or politicians.^[q]

Journalists as Enablers of Islamization

The Western press normally recognizes no taboo: whether the subject is Christendom, the pope, Western or non-Western politicians, artists, countries, scientists, ideologies or ideologues, religions or sects. Everything can be analyzed, criticized, caricatured — and the freedom to do so is right.

However, the Speaker of the German Journalist Association (Deutscher Journalistenverband — DJV), Hendrik Zörner, of all people, vehemently criticized the reprinting of the Danish cartoons in German newspapers making a reference to the “Code of the Press.” According to the Code, “publication in Word and Picture that in Form and Content can be possibly injurious to the religious sensibilities of a people group violates the stipulations agreed upon in the Code” (numeral 10 of the German Press Code).⁵²

The question is, whether Zörner will forego any publication of Hitler or Stalin cartoons in the future with respect to the sensibilities of the ever present and internationally recognized standards of the numerous fellowships of neo-Nazis and Old Stalinists? Perhaps he should even call for a cessation of George W. Bush cartoons because the millions who voted for him might have their sensibilities offended as well. No, one can conclude that he wouldn’t do that. But neither personal audacity nor journalistic ethics were the guidebook here: rather the confidence that no danger would threaten him from any corner. Apparently Zörner is not versed in Islam, nor in the ethics of his career and the personal duty of his journalistic guild. These all command the journalist to write with unwavering clarity and with boldness, to write down the truth, even when it is not politically correct to do so, as well as to fight against any form of totalitarian exercise of power — even, and especially when, this exercise of power cloaks itself in theological clothing.

In France, the Nouvel Obs prints an interview with the philosopher Regis Debray who has aligned himself with the international scenario for subjugation to Islam, and who has done no less than called for a voluntary self-control of expression of opinion with respect to Islam. Debray says:

“We cannot transfer our thought categories and our systems to another culture that has a history and where it has played a structural role like it was with us 300 years ago.”⁵³

The Values-Relativist Debray may be a philosopher, but he understands very little: little of his own history, little of the French Enlightenment, little of the most destructive consequences of an appeasement philosophy — and even less of Islam who, in the above citation from Debray, “today would be the “peaceful religion” in power in France,” but tomorrow might burn even its non-Muslim supporters.^[r]

Numerous newspapers and periodicals in the USA have also refused to reprint the Muhammad cartoons. The critical US historian and columnist, Anne Appelbaum, writes about this in the Washington Post:

“Hypocrisy among the cultural left. Dozens of American newspapers, the Post included, have declared that they will not print the cartoons, but that they would rather — in the words of a self-righteous editorial — ‘cease from superfluous attacks against religious symbols’”⁵⁴

Appelbaum and the German sociologist Wolfgang Sofsky were a couple of the few voices who could correctly classify the religious and political background of the conflict regarding the cartoons and properly conclude that Islam’s aggressive nature was the real cause of that conflict. Sofsky writes in the Welt:

“The crowd is by no means is looking out for democratic freedoms … the impulse that drives them is much older. The righteous multitude desires to have control of their arch enemies; they desire to slay and burn them. In general, they have the West in their sights. The only freedom they are not finished with is the freedom to kill.”⁵⁵

Authors as Enablers of Islamization

Already back in 1919, the German author Kurt Tucholsky had formulated an answer to the question where the limits should be set for enlightening writings, and especially those that are packed with satirical criticism. His answer became famous:

“What is allowed in satire? Everything!”⁵⁶

Only a short century later, the German Literature Nobel Peace Prize winner, Günter Grass made the statement about the publishing of the Muhammad cartoons, that it was

“a conscious and planned provocation by a rightwing Danish newspaper.”⁵⁷

Mr. Grass had already reached an “understanding” about the terror attacks on the New York twin towers and had admitted to a certain sympathy for the Islamic terrorists.

And here he is again: the automatic left-wing reflex of casting each and every criticism of Islam immediately and unchecked upon the right-wing political camp. In an interview with the FAZ (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung), he utters not a single word about the worldwide agitation of Islam against the “infidels,” not one word concerning the threats of murder against the Danish cartoonists and countless publishers, writers and journalists in the whole world who were bold enough to criticize Islam. Not one word was issued about Muhammad who committed numerous misdeeds against children, the thousands of objectors he had slain, who declared women to be second-class persons, who had a whole Jewish clan beheaded because that clan would not convert to Islam, and who for a long time (though dead) has waged a war, the 1400-year Jihad, in order to increase his borders to his own benefit. And now, today, he is in the middle of Europe, standing ready to take over this continent.

Now, these and similar themes make up the elements of the cartoons that Grass declares to be drawn by the “right-wingers.” However, in contrast to Grass’ opinion, this “Danish paper” puts its fingers into the gaping wounds (caused by Islam) and depicts some of the gravest grievances against Islam. Grass, however, goes so far indeed in his friendship with Islamofascism as to seriously propose on the occasion of Lübeck’s candidacy for being the “cultural capital of Europe” that a Lübeck church be rechristened as a mosque.⁵⁸ Whatever is preached there doesn’t seem to interest him anymore. Let’s bring to mind the nature the Quran texts^[s] that are preached in mosques throughout the world:

“And if you meet the infidel, then off with the head until you wreak massacre among them; and then fasten the bonds!” Sura 47:4

“And strike them (the infidels) dead wherever you encounter them.” Sura 2:191

“And if they turn away (from Islam and give no ear to your challenge to believe), then seize them and kill them where(ever) you find them…” Sura 4:89

“Oh believers, take neither Jew nor Christian as friends.” Sura 5:54

“Oh you who believe, battle against that one of the infidels that is neighbor to you.” Sura 9:123

Etc., etc., etc.

There are only two possible reasons behind Grass engaging himself in this theofascism. First, Grass has no concept of Islam. Second, Grass does know Islam. In the first case, he is an ignoramus. In the second case, he is a friend of a fascist religion.

We could possibly excuse his membership in the Waffen-SS — a confession that came much too late — as the expression of inexperienced youth. However, in his great age, where one should be able to ascribe wisdom and worldly understanding to him, to be a champion for a murderous, people-disdaining, child-raping prophet, and for that religion, is inexcusable. In his blind enthusiasm and criticism-free advocacy for that “religion of peace,” Grass himself has become a danger to the freedom that he believes he has fought for his whole life.

Psychoanalysts as Enablers of Islamization

One other icon of the 1968 Movement, caller of the shots and leading figure of the Peace Movement, is the German psychoanalyst Horst-Eberhard Richter. Like Grass, Richter also sees the fault for the cartoon conflict as primarily belonging to the West. Audio of Richter:

“The West should desist from all provocations and call forth feelings of humility and humbleness. We need to esteem the cultural identity of Islamic countries more highly.”⁵⁹

This sentence needs to be analyzed. Richter is an icon of the left wing and the Greens, a leading figure practically worshipped by a whole generation of peace-driven deniers of reality and Easter marchers. He exercises no criticism against the cutting off of hands, flogging for no reason, or the stoning of women who have committed no crime other than that they wanted to be free from their husbands. He exercises no criticism against the fact that in Islamic lands today critics of “the religion of peace” have their eyes put out without anaesthetic, that girls at just two years of age are forced to marry dirty old men, that women according to Islamic law (Shari’a) are condemned to be second-class people.

He exercises no criticism against the highest courts who give their blessing to the worst of all forms of paedophilia: sex with nursing infants.⁶⁰

Does he not know all of that? Now, perhaps twenty years ago we could have let Richter get away with this because of his ignorance regarding things Islam. Today, though, after 11 September, after Bali, after Madrid, after London, after the inexpressible activities of the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan, after the mass killings of homosexuals in Iran (and now recently in Iraq), and now the historically unmatched persecution of Christians that is currently playing out before us in practically every Islam-ruled country, Richter has no excuse. He cannot and will not be allowed to escape the dishonor and disgrace due him, in the face of screaming anti-Western and pro-Islam misanalyses, and in the face of his cowardly and hurried kowtowing to fascistic Islam. Richter, himself a psychoanalyst and psychotherapist for decades, not only in Germany, but well-known in all of the West, passes up no opportunity to ascribe as many aggressions as possible to the West. Indeed he seeks to discredit Western systems by describing them as “power-possessed devils”⁶¹ and accuse them as being phobicly and paranoidally disturbed.⁶² However, in the case of the worldwide Muslim uprisings that followed the publication of the Muhammad cartoons, this judge of the system and of capitalism makes an astonishing mutation from a rigorous accuser to a loving grandpa-like figure:

“We know about such temper outbreaks in these countries. We should not heap the rioters and the vandalism of furious masses in with the basic form of the majority…”⁶³

Not one word about the 140 casualties from the uprisings, not one word about the murdered priests and nuns, not a single word about the destruction of dozens of churches, nothing about the killing of the innocent, while Richter, through his description “temper outbreak” trivialized the worldwide persecution of Christianity by Islam. How selective this distortion of perception is. It borders on paranoia, and it comes from one of the “most influential” psychoanalysts in postwar Germany. To think that such incomparable ignorance would come from Richter, “the one who understands Islam,” who on one hand makes out “man” to be an “inhumane being,” and on the other hand engages himself for Islam — expressly for the most inhumane, most murderous, most morbid variety of masculomania on the globe!

Just like most of his scientific colleagues, Richter addresses the problem of Islam primarily through communications theory. He addresses the issue of a so-called Western deficit of dialog and understanding, a so-to-speak mechanical dialog that occurs because there has been no effort or only a rudimentary attempt to deal with the issues of Islam. For the family therapist and experts in communication deficit, the whole world relies consistently on familiar processes such as the conflict between children, parents and adult-id and therefore it is reduced to treating narcissistic illnesses. For Richter, this is practical because he believes, as a degreed psychotherapist, that he has the correct answers for the political and religious conflicts of the world. This is how an individual psychologist mutates directly into a psychological world philosopher without having to grapple with the issues of politics and religion. But there is a certain point of ignorance about issues where even the best generalist, when lacking the knowledge of facts, starts to mutate into nothing more than a dilettante, an amateur. Richter shows these symptoms in his approach to Islam in his essay that is characteristically titled, “Islamophobia — a symptom of the ‘psychological illness of unrest (lack of peace)’.” In this writing, he poses the rhetorically targeted question:

“Is Islamophobia a symptom of psychopathological restlessness (lack of peace)?”⁶⁴

Correct diagnosis — but incorrect patient. For Richter exchanges cause with effect. The critic of Islam is not the one that is “psychopathologically without peace,” as Richter would have it, rather the “religion” of Islam. In order to make it clear and without question, one of the most well-known and respected psychotherapists in Germany, one who fights against masculomania and totalitarianism (as Richter says of himself), analyzes the criticism against theofascism and the male-religion Islam as illnesses — ex cathedra, so to say. The killer phrase “Islamophobia” can have no other meaning.

Given such a grave misdiagnosis by an expert, we must be allowed to ask one question. The question is this: If Richter had lived three-quarters of a century earlier, would he have come upon the same diagnosis for critics of national socialism and titled it “Naziphobia”? Or for critics of communist totalitarianism as being “Stalinphobia”? Or perhaps “Maophobia” for critics of Chinese communism? Beside the point? Absolutely not! Many of his colleagues in communist countries have made this very diagnosis and have had critics of communism committed to Middle-Ages-class psychiatric care units only to disappear forever.

And like Grass, Richter may be just as famous. But he writes, like many of his colleagues, about things of which he has no understanding. This may be a form of megalomania, even a sign of self-glory that can be observed of many old 1968ers to this day. In any case, Richter makes so many unqualified comments to an especially successful accomplice of the “psychopathologically peaceless” Islam, and there are still hundreds of thousands of young Peace Movement individuals that believe every word that comes out of his pen.

The Left as Enablers of Islamization

The burden of critical discussion about the theme of Islam that is led by a vast number of persons and parties — that the left-wing opinion makers usually blame on the right-wing camp — can really be blamed on the left-wing-Green-self-righteous crowd. Since the left wing refuses to have open debate about totalitarian, inhumane Islam to this day, they have abandoned the political field of “criticism of Islam” to others by which they doubly refuse through demonizing this criticism as “hostile to foreigners.”

However, this strategy of demonizing the right as employed by the left has developed into an ideological boomerang, because in the long run the steadfast and constant assignment of the term “hostile to foreigners” to “criticism of Islam” makes it nearly impossible in the spectrum of the left, even in the most valid and obvious cases, to become actively critical of Islam. In this case, this accusation of “hostility to foreigners” may fall back on to them with full force, a substantive and argumentative vicious circle for which the left-wing do-gooders will have no escape, and in the end, Islam will be the real winner.

Danish Converts to Islam as Enablers of Islamization

In Denmark, a trend toward conversion to the “religion of peace” can also be seen. As in Germany and other Western countries, a large portion of the almost 4,000 Danish converts to Islam have settled into the leftwing and Green spectrum of politics. This fact is clearly seen in a study at the University of Copenhagen.⁶⁵ According to this study, the subjects being dealt with were converts to Islam and open opponents of the Western model of democracy and who want Islam to be the form of rule in their country. This internal about-face of values of an erstwhile leftwing Islam convert is astonishing:

away from communist-correct atheism and straight to a religion where any doubt about its god and his prophet is punishable by death, and to a religion that desires to force the whole world under Allah’s banner.
away from the demand of equality between man and woman — to a religion of gender apartheid, where according to the law and religious manuscripts (Sunna and Quran) the subjugation and position of the woman with almost no rights is sealed for all time
away from equality for all people to the equality of all like-minded individuals, the Muslims. In contrast, all other people, according to the Quran, according to Muhammad and according to the agents of the “religion of peace” can be killed with confidence.

This is only a small piece of cloth from this new religious coat those Western converts have slipped on over their previously leftist scene when they decided expressly to become Muslim. One wonders, if at their conversion into the “religion of peace,” somebody told them that there is no return to their pre-Islamic life, and in the case of turning away from Islam they would be killed according to Muhammad’s personal challenge:

“Kill every one that leaves the religion (of Islam)!”⁶⁶

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Conclusion: After Failing With Hitler, the Western Appeasement^[t] Crowd Does So Again

With its “politically correct” reaction to minority hatred by its Muslim immigrants, Denmark now lies within the general mainstream of the political reactions by practically all Western governments. Apparently, these countries have not learned their lesson from the devastating appeasement policy that the Allies had exercised as a response to Hitler’s expansionist plans. Just as it was then with the National Socialists (Nazis), even so now they feed the Islamic “crocodile” (Churchill) hoping that they will be last ones consumed by it.^[u] The “never again war” mentality that Western countries have summarily taken from the Second World War is as wrong as it is absurd.

Appeasement is wrong because societies dedicated to this maxim present themselves as an easy prize, and, as we see in the current case of this massive Islamization of Europe, they will surrender due to lack of defenses.⁶⁷

Appeasement is absurd because historical experience shows that almost without exception the rogue regimes of this world have had to be overcome by violence. It was this way with Hitler, it was the same way with the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, and it was so with the cannibalistic regime of Idi Amin in Uganda, who in the end had converted to Islam.

Auschwitz, Sobibor, and Treblinka were not liberated by self-righteous peace demonstrations in London, Paris or New York, despite what one might think. They were liberated at the price of hundreds of thousands of civilian and military victims of the tanks of the Allied War Forces and Red Army. Pol Pot was not overthrown by peace vigils of concerned do-gooders in the West. It was by means of massive military insertion by the troops of Vietnam, in this case at the cost of 1,000 dead. Those who have chosen freedom for nothing have already chosen oppression.

No, the only correct conclusion from the Second World War must exclaim:

“Never again toleration of intolerance!”

If this sentence would have been included in the preambles of the constitutions of free countries, then such an intolerant and totalitarian system like Islam would not have been able to nestle itself in among the countries of the free world and be validated because of the guarantee of religious freedom provided by these constitutions, but this has happened without exception. If this sentence had been a part of the constitutional conventions in Western lands, then a religion like Islam would have been quickly recognized as an acute danger to freedom and would have been forbidden by the highest constitutional courts. Instead of the policy of chumming up to Islam by means of clergy, intellectuals, politicians, jurists and artists, and instead of the flood of mosques being built in the West, the Muslims would have been confronted by a value system that is well advanced and — with respect to science, culture and human rights — that is decidedly superior.

But the Western elite to this day cowers away from such forms of confrontation against this theocratic barbarism. Maybe it is because they have forgotten that freedom must be defended and recaptured anew every day. Maybe it is because they have a private or open hatred of their Western system. Perhaps either they do not realize the existential threat emanating from Islam, or, since the rapid and unexpected end of communism, they deep down secretly wish to collaborate with Islam in its ancient endeavor, and with Islam’s help, overthrow the Western system. However, let it be said to all appeasers and all foes of Western freedom: the Islamic crocodile will consume you first!

The Collective Failure of the Western Elite

To be qualified to speak on this and other truths about the unique essence of the “religion of peace” as a journalist, politician or author requires intense activity concerning Islam. It is precisely for this reason, time and content, that most Western journalists and intellectuals have cowered away from this subject. And because of this retreat from the issue they have failed in their main task: the commitment to advocate for freedom and the relentless enlightenment of their readers.

Politicians and jurists are guilty in another area: they have opened their borders, practically without limit, to a historically unmatched mass immigration by Muslims. Every year about one million new Muslims stream into the various countries of the European Union, while at the same time in their original Islamic countries, non-Muslims are mercilessly persecuted, thrown into prisons, tortured, and killed. These politicians, judges and attorneys hold the prime executive responsibility for the establishment of parallel Islamic societies in every European country. These societies are not only unwilling to integrate in Europe, but on the contrary and by every implication, they are working to remove the liberal European constitutional laws and eventually replace them with an Islamo-European Caliphate (“Eurabia”). Where realization and defense are concerned, not only have jurists and politicians miserably failed, but even worse: by their inaction regarding the fatal Islamic threat against their countries they have broken the oath of the office imposed upon them by the constitution that they are to defend their people from harm.

A complete and historically developed value system — that of the Western enlightenment, of human rights, of freedom of thought and of the freedom of the individual — has collapsed in the face of an international scenario because of cartoons that:

1.		were legitimate in content
2.		were formally legitimate because of the freedom of criticism or debate, even if they might not have been correct in content,
3.		were a blot on the face of Islam, especially when considering the humiliation and scorn of Christianity, Jewry, and of the West that are the daily way of life in Islamic countries. Anyone who has at least once seen the hate-filled genocidal cartoons drawn up by the media in the Islamic world knows that the agitation regarding the Muhammad cartoons was lop-sided, reactionary, and hypocritical.

Islam pays such fussy attention to not being criticized — but by the same token, it is limitless in its constant and destructive criticism against the non-Islamic world. Muslims in the whole world believe that they are allowed to burn, shred and spit upon the “holy” symbols of non-Muslims and go unpunished. One seldom sees a Muslim demonstration in which the flags of Western countries are not shredded, set on fire or trampled underfoot. Muslims know no limitation when they seek to agitate the West with their verbal attacks. And they hold no limits when they follow up these verbal attacks with their cowardly and malicious terror attacks in the world — mostly against innocent civilians, men, women as well as children. This call by Islam for the ban of criticism against them is the greatest and potentially the most dangerous single attack against the Western-Enlightened world, and in the face of the daily hate and war rhetoric coming from the “religion of peace” against all non-Islamic countries, the ban of criticism against Islam shows itself to be a farce and ultimate hypocrisy.

The cartoon conflict has demonstrated that there can be no compromise between the following: the demands of Islam for criticism-free recognition and subjugation to all of its values on the one hand, and on the other the tradition of Western Enlightenment, according to which no theme is allowed to escape critical evaluation (religions included).

It’s either the one or the other. There is either only thought control, as in Islam, or there is complete freedom of thought, as dictated by Western Enlightenment.

However, because Islam, since its early existence, explicitly threatens each criticism and each critical inquiry and scrutiny of its matters and persons (Muhammad), there can be no permanent political and societal coexistence between Muslims and non-Muslims. A look at the history of Islam as well as at the current political situation demonstrates this fact. Islam accepts only one single form of such a coexistence: the absolute predominance of Islam over all other religions — the subjugation of all other religions to its authority to the end that the only choice is to convert to Islam — or be killed.

The belief in a peaceful coexistence as accepted by most Western multicultural adherents, and that governs most intellectuals and politicians, is born out of factual ignorance of the total character of Islam, and in the end it will turn out to be a fatal illusion. As long as Europe stays on this course of ideological and political paralysis, at the end of this “peaceful coexistence” the only winner, as is already established, will be the “religion of peace.” The Muslims themselves know best that Islam means “war” — and by no means “peace”.

“Every one of mine who preaches and declares that Islam does not have the slogan ‘war, war, all the way to victory,’ and that this slogan isn’t in the Quran are right. The Quran demands much more, it demands ‘war, war, all the way to total annihilation of their corruption.’” Ruhollah Khomeini⁶⁸

The one desiring to stop Eurabia from happening can no longer rely on politics or justice. The one who wishes to stop Eurabia must himself become active (in the following):

1.		Cast no more votes for pro-Islamic politicians. Cancel subscriptions to pro-Islamic newspapers and periodicals.
2.		Readers need to send letters en masse answering articles and commentaries that categorize critics of Islam as being rightwing extremist and/or articles and commentaries that deny that the Islamization of Europe is really happening.
3.		Send E-mail chain letters to radio and TV editors who put on Islamophilic (Islam-friendly or Islam-loving) shows.
4.		Mass advertisements are in order for judges and attorneys that bend German/European law who aren’t actively involved in immigration criminal law.
5.		Cast no more votes for mayors and parties that have actively engaged themselves in the support of building mosques, and widely publish the names of those who do so.
6.		Send protest letters en masse to town halls, mayoral offices, party offices.
7.		Organize sit-ins and both small and large demonstrations where possible.
8.		Inform friends and acquaintances regarding Islam — for example, the forwarding of articles exposing the true nature of the issue and other information by E-mail
9.		Share knowledge about Islam with friends, partners and acquaintances
10.		When voting (whether local, state, federal, or European, vote only for those parties that recognize the danger of Islam and stand against it.
11.		Encourage those politicians, journalists, intellectuals, artists and other citizens that are bold enough to exercise criticism about Islam and to accept the stigma of “radical right” that the left and Islamic associations will attach to them.

Everything is now laid out on the table. But one truth now stands firm: “Whoever does not fight has already lost the battle.”

— Michael Mannheimer

Contact: M.Mannheimer@gmx.net

“The Perils of Diversity”

2010-12-08T05:10:00.000-08:00

Book Review: “The Perils of Diversity”

The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.
For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.

Inspired by Eurabia by Bat Ye’or, the only book to appear in print so far based on my material is Defeating Eurabia, part of which is available online in German. For Scandinavian readers, I have contributed a chapter in Norwegian to the book Selvmordsparadigmet (“The Suicide Paradigm”), published in 2010 by Ole J. Anfindsen, who runs the website Honest Thinking. Anfindsen believes that the Western world is in the process of committing suicide, and that the ruling ideology after the Second World War, especially from the 1960s on, has been suicidal. His main emphasis is not on Islam but on Politically Correct censorship and the Multiculturalism of Western oligarchs. The same is true of my contribution to his book.

The following quotes with page references are taken from the recent book The Perils of Diversity: Immigration and Human Nature by Byron M. Roth, a Professor Emeritus of Psychology from the USA. He argues that the debate over immigration policy in the Western world is critically uninformed by the sciences of evolutionary biology and psychology. In his work he examines the intersection between culture, genetics, IQ and society. Prominent among the fundamental features of human nature is a natural bias toward one’s own kind, making harmony in multi-ethnic societies problematic at best. All historical evidence indicates that “diversity” is not a strength, and that blood is thicker than water. Ignoring such biological realities leads to failed social experiments that may cause great human suffering.

Roth addresses the disturbingly undemocratic nature of the regime of mass immigration imposed by authorities on the citizens of all Western nations in defiance of their expressed wishes, and shows that the chasm between elite views and public opinion is so deep that current policies can only be maintained by an increasingly totalitarian suppression of dissent.

There is a consensus of opinion accepted by the vast majority of leaders in business, industry and academia. Billionaire George Soros has established and funded the Open Society Institute (OSI), which operates over thirty branches worldwide and promotes Multiculturalism. Soros was also a major financial backer of Barack Obama for US President. There are numerous organizations, academic programs, religious groups and labor organizations that support our current immigration policies. Many business and industry organizations spend vast sums in lobbying efforts to oppose any limitation of immigration, legal or illegal. Combined, these groups have created a convergence of opinion among Western elites, a consensus that popular resistance to mass immigration is caused by ignorant xenophobia that should be ignored in setting public policy. Opposing all these powerful forces are the average citizens of all Western countries.

Francis Fukuyama explains that “Postmodern elites, particularly in Europe, feel that they have evolved beyond identities defined by religion and nation and have arrived at a superior place.” Esteemed English philosopher Roger Scruton observes that such elites dominate European national parliaments and the bureaucracy of the European Union. A typical member of this elite class repudiates national loyalties, defines his goals and ideals against his own nation and sees himself “as a defender of enlightened universalism” against local chauvinism.

Byron M. Roth, page 52:

“Not surprisingly, the multicultural program these elites promote is, by its very nature, profoundly undemocratic, in that it imposes changes on society that citizens most assuredly do not want and which they resist when given the opportunity to do so. Hence the extraordinary repression of dissent in the immigration debate and the totalitarian imposition of political correctness wherever elites have power, such as in American universities and in most European political parties. Nobel Prize winning novelist Doris Lessing, no enemy of the left, argued in a 1992 article that political correctness is ‘immediately evident as a legacy of Communism… a continuation of that old bully, the Party line.’ She argues: ‘millions of people, the rug of Communism pulled out from under them, are searching frantically, and perhaps not even knowing it, for another dogma.’ They are rabble-rousers are using the ‘most dirty and often cruel tactics’ and are ‘no less rabble-rousers because they see themselves as anti-racists or feminists or whatever.’ It is difficult to disagree with Lessing that the totalitarian methods and utopian ambitions of multiculturalism clearly have their roots in Communist ideology. The multicultural program is, to be sure, spectacularly utopian.”

The ruling oligarchs of the West seem unwilling to ask what the consequences will be if their vision is flawed. Many left-leaning Western intellectuals defended the barbarities of Communism for years because they viewed its end goals as noble. The same intellectuals now excuse the excesses of their governments in promoting large-scale immigration. After all, the goal of world harmony and universal justice is as noble as the goal of economic equality.

Page 53:

“Many today call the tactics of European multiculturalists a ‘soft’ totalitarianism. However, the willingness of governments to put people in jail or deprive them of their livelihoods for disagreeing with government policies can hardly be characterized as soft. It should be recalled that in its last years, the Soviet Union rarely murdered opponents, but used tactics similar to the ones being used today in Europe. A world without borders would be one without refuge from despotic rule. Despotic governance was the rule throughout most of recorded history, and it is still the rule for the majority of the world’s citizens… Whether people would be better off without independent nation states, living under the rule of a world government, or in large supernational blocs such as the EU is by no means clear. In fact, history and reason suggest that just the opposite would be the case. Most utopian dreams when implemented have, in fact, been real-life nightmares for the vast majority. One is hard-pressed to think of an exception.”

Serge Trifkovic, the Serbian-American author of the book Defeating Jihad: How the War on Terrorism Can Be Won — in Spite of Ourselves, agrees with this analysis. The ruling elite insist that Western countries belong to the whole world and that our societies should be “colorblind.” These ideas have become tools of European demographic suicide. “No other race subscribes to these moral principles,” Jean Raspail wrote a generation ago, “because they are weapons of self-annihilation.” The permitted consensus opinion promotes de facto open borders. The West is hamstrung by guilt-ridden haters and appeasers “whose hold on the political power, the media, and the academe is undemocratic, unnatural, and obscene.” Trifkovic describes the “treason” of the elite class or traitor class, who despite their self-image as enlightened and rational are rootless, arrogant and cynically manipulative fifth columnists:

"By 1999 then-Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott felt ready to declare that the United States may not exist ‘in its current form’ in the 21st century, because the very concept of nationhood — here and throughout the world — will have been rendered obsolete… The ideological foundation for Talbott’s beliefs was stated bluntly: ‘All countries are basically social arrangements, accommodations to changing circumstances. No matter how permanent and even sacred they may seem at any one time, in fact they are all artificial and temporary.’ To the members of his class, all countries are but transient, virtual-reality entities. Owing emotional allegiance to any one of them is irrational, and risking one’s life for its sake is absurd. The refusal of the Western elite class to protect their nations from jihadist infiltration is the biggest betrayal in history… Those Americans and Europeans who love their lands and nations more than any others, and who put their families and their neighborhoods before all others, are normal people. Those who tell them that their attachments should be global and that their lands and neighborhoods belong to the whole world are sick and evil.”

Roth again, page 439:

“The elimination of border and passport checks within Europe meant that EU residents and authorized visitors could freely move between EU countries unimpeded. But it also meant that illegal entrants could also move about without hindrance. This meant that securing the external borders of the EU was critical for immigration and security purposes. However, the EU member states have not agreed on EU-wide measures to do so. As a consequence, countries bordering on the Mediterranean — and especially those with island possessions close to Africa, such as Spain and Italy — became magnets for African migrants seeking illegal entrance into the EU. Once a migrant gains access to an island of an EU nation, he cannot be simply sent home, but has to be individually processed for deportation, a time-consuming and costly process. In many cases individuals simply leave shelters and detention centers and spread out into the countryside, and many travel to the mainland of other European states.”

Byron M. Roth further believes (page 31) that “Immigration policy is remarkably similar in all Western countries in its encouragement of large-scale Third-World immigration, while at the same time, in all countries, the native population, by wide majorities, opposes those policies.” He speaks about a convergence of the so-called political Left and Right when it comes to promoting non-European mass immigration, which has essentially crippled the democratic system and rendered it nearly meaningless in these and other crucial issues. Those on the Left are international Socialists while those on the Right channel the business lobby, with its desire for unlimited access to markets as well as cheap labor. These two groups, allegedly adversaries, are in fact allies in the project of breaking down Western nation-states.

Page 38:

“In the case of the doctrine of multiculturalism and mass immigration, however, the political leaders of both the left and the right, and virtually all academicians, are unanimous in their support. The consequence is that the members of the general public, who are most affected by immigration, have no parties to represent their interests and are left with a powerful sense of disenfranchisement for the simple reason that on issues of immigration they are, in fact, disenfranchised. A case in point is the 2008 United States Presidential elections, where both nominees favored even more liberalized immigration policies than those then in existence, and this in spite of the overwhelming opposition to these policies by the electorate.”

He claims (page 440) that “On both sides of the Atlantic, public officials, no matter what they say to their electorates, are quite simply unwilling to stem the flow of immigration. That the vast majority of EU citizens oppose this massive migration seems beside the point. As Craig Parsons and Timothy Smeeding aptly put it, this result was the product of ‘non-majoritarian institutions — constitutional guarantees of human rights and courts — that protected this movement against restrictions by elected officials.’ But this begs the question why the elected officials of all European countries who, after all, design and implement EU policies and who still control the scope of the EU, have acquiesced in these widely unpopular developments. Given the above findings and the data dealing with education, employment, welfare dependency, and crime, it is hardly surprising that large majorities of Europeans have grave misgivings about the current level of immigration from Third World countries. Migration Watch, a United Kingdom policy think tank, commissioned a poll conducted in 2007 by the international organization YouGov to sample the attitudes of the British Public. Overall, 81% thought immigration should be substantially reduced, with 57% agreeing ‘strongly’ and 24% tending to agree. Only 14% disagreed.”

The gap between rich and poor in the USA is wider than ever and the middle class is slowly disappearing. While 90 percent of Americans have seen only modest gains in their incomes since 1973, incomes have almost tripled for people at the upper end of the scale. In 1979, one third of the profits the country produced went to the richest 1 percent of society. In 2010 it was almost 60 percent. In 1950, the average corporate CEO earned 30 times as much as an ordinary worker. Sixty years later it was 300 times as much. These figures indicate that the wealthy elites are not being irrational. So far, globalization has indeed been beneficial — for them personally in the short run, but not necessarily for the country as a whole in the long run.

As I’ve indicated before, there is only one major party in the West today: the Transnational Post-European Party for Multiculturalism and Mass Immigration. You retain, for the time being, the privilege of voting for who should be its figurehead at any given moment, but you do not get to have a say about which policy the Party should follow. That is reserved for the oligarchs. The peasants — that means you — can be distracted by breasts, football and reality TV. Those who still protest can be labeled “Nazis” and dragged in front of a court of law. The establishment Right is little different from the Left, rendering these terms nearly meaningless.

All Leftist parties are in favor of dismantling the West in its traditional form; Socialists have always been opposed to nation-states. Whatever opposition there is can be found on the political Right, but it is fragmented, and those who pose a genuine challenge to the oligarchs and the status quo will be ruthlessly demonized; assassinated like Pim Fortuyn in the Netherlands, put on trial like Geert Wilders, banned by law as was the Vlaams Blok when it was the largest party in Belgium, or assaulted in their private homes by thugs with the quiet approval of the authorities, as is the case with the Sweden Democrats. Individuals are legally prosecuted for telling the truth about Third World immigration in general and Islamic immigration in particular, among them Jussi Halla-aho in Finland and Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff in Austria. All of this takes place in the supposedly “free and democratic West.”

The modern West has become an ideological dictatorship, a “one-idea society” where a self-appointed elite of Multicultural oligarchs impose censorship from above. The same basic mechanisms exist in North America, too, but they have become formalized in the EU. I would personally estimate that “the Left” in the widest possible sense is the cause of 65% of our current troubles. The “Right,” including its Big Business backers, is responsible for 30% through their support of globalization and mass immigration, and an additional 5% just for general cowardice and uselessness in confronting Leftist aggression.

Neither side of the spectrum views a nation as an organic unit of related people with a shared history, mythology and mentality. Marxists want to get rid of all nation-states, starting with Western ones. Big Business interests see the nation-state as no different from a multinational corporation, a tool for maximizing short-term profits, where one employs people to do a job for a limited period of time, and after that leave them to their own devices. Those Europeans who view their nation as a natural unit of historically and biologically related people are branded “right-wing extremists” by both these groups, who together largely control Western politics. Nobody supports the interests of the white middle class, who are being bled dry financially.

Western oligarchs reacted in the same manner to the democratic rejection of minarets in Switzerland: They immediately, from Washington to London, attacked the Swiss and issued thinly veiled threats, apparently fearful that “dangerous” ideas might spread to their own countries. We often hear talk about “cultural suicide,” but in this case the Swiss people clearly did not want to commit national suicide; the transnational Western Multicultural elite wanted to force them to do so. This Globalist agenda is deliberate and well-organized, not accidental.

Mass immigration is being forced down the throats of Westerners even when they don’t want it. They are victims of an evil policy; perhaps victims who don’t put up enough resistance, but victims nonetheless. Eurabia, the deliberate merger of Europe with the Middle East, is not a “conspiracy theory” but a well-documented fact, despite what the media might tell you. This is being done on such a grand scale that it is difficult for the ordinary person, certainly if he relies only on the heavily censored mainstream media, to fully grasp the magnitude of what’s going on. If he is at the same time culturally broken down and constantly harassed with “anti-racism”, then the average European citizen can to a large extent be neutralized as potential opposition to the oligarchs and their schemes, which was no doubt the intention to begin with.

Byron M. Roth mentions that rising crime has become a serious problem in recent years, very often committed by non-European minorities. He documents a vastly disproportionate representation of Muslims and blacks in Western European prisons. Riots and gang rape by young Muslim men have been and are still being purposefully downplayed by Western authorities and mass media in order to hide the real truth about “cultural diversity.” He also mentions that low IQ correlates very highly with rates of criminality and antisocial behavior, and wonders what consequences the mass importation of low-IQ peoples to the West will have. Is a certain minimum average IQ necessary to develop and maintain a complex society?

The Perils of Diversity again, page 60-61:

“Are the autocratic societies of North Africa the natural byproduct of societies where an insufficient fraction of the population has the intellectual wherewithal to deal with political and economic complexity? If people from North Africa and Southwest Asia replace European people, will European civilization, including its democracy and wealth, be replaced by some new civilization with very different dynamics and values? Will America be the same if it becomes a confederation of different ethnic groups with different values and aptitudes? Given current immigration policies these are the most important questions the Western world must attempt to assess. Such a demographic realignment would be epochal in nature and would have ramifications in every corner of the globe. When coupled with the rise of China and India as world superpowers, it heralds a new chapter in world history that will shape the destiny of mankind for centuries to come. Thoughtful people would not hesitate to consider what these epochal changes portend for their progeny. Neither would they hesitate to openly consider the full consequences of the current immigration policies which, if left on their present course, will prove to be irreversible and quite possibly tragic.”

Roth speculates whether what may emerge from these demographic patterns is that the USA will move in the direction of countries such as Mexico, dysfunctional states with oligarchic politics. A primary thesis of his book is that societies are mainly the product of the genetic nature of the human beings who make them up, not geography as Jared Diamond claims.

Page 468:

“Put another way, a people living in an environment rich in natural resources may not be able to exploit those resources if they lack the human capital to do so. On the other hand, societies with greater human capital can prosper in places with only meager natural resources. An important element of this thesis is the recognition that culture-gene interaction is a two-way street; genes affect cultures, but cultures, in turn, affect genes. It is important, however, to recognize that the effect of genes on culture is likely to operate quite quickly, while the effects of culture on genes require a much longer time to take place. In other words, changes in the demographic makeup of a population will have almost immediate effects, whereas the evolutionary impact of a society on its inhabitants will take centuries, at the least, to take effect… it follows that current immigration patterns are likely to change quite quickly the societies to which immigrants go. It will also change those countries, especially those with small populations, from which immigrants come. The nature of these changes is likely to be wide-ranging and is, without exaggeration, of world-historical significance that will affect future generations for centuries to come.”

Roth talks quite candidly about the significance of IQ. The population of the USA is expected to reach at least 400 million by 2050. By then China’s more homogeneous population may be about 1.4 billion while India’s population is expected to reach 1.6 billion.

The Perils of Diversity, page 473:

“In China, with an average estimated IQ of 105, approximately 37% of population will exceed the IQ threshold of 110, as compared to about 16% of the population in the U. S. Based on the current population estimates, this means that 520 million Chinese will be college-capable compared to 64 million Americans, or a ratio of about 8 to 1. Even if we use Lynn and Vanhanen’s lowest sample IQ from the 10 samples reported for the Chinese, which was an IQ of 102, some 30% of China’s population, or about 420 million people, will exceed the 110 threshold, or about 6.5 times the number of Americans exceeding that threshold. Put another way, China will have more people in this high IQ group, even using the lowest estimate of China’s IQ, than the total projected population of the entire United States. Of course, China may not be able to provide advanced training for those many millions in the next four decades, but they will certainly be able to provide it in ever greater numbers, especially if they make it a high state priority, as appears to be the case.”

The mean IQ of India is much lower than that of China which, coupled with its large Muslim population, means that India probably won’t be able to compete with China in the long run. However, with a projected population of 1600 million people, this would give a total of about 50 million people exceeding the 110 threshold, not much fewer than the number in the USA.

The elites in all Western societies have wholeheartedly adopted an extreme form of Multiculturalism. Page 444:

“It denies historical and scientific evidence that people differ in important biological and cultural ways that makes their assimilation into host countries problematic. It is also extreme in the viciousness with which it attacks those who differ on this issue. These attacks are accompanied by a very generalized and one-sided denigration of Western traditions and Western accomplishments, and claims that a collective guilt should be assumed by all Europeans (whites) for the sins of their forebears. In the United States those sins include the displacement and destruction of the indigenous cultures of the Americas, the evils of American slavery, and its continued discrimination against blacks and other minority groups. In Europe those sins include the excesses of colonialism and, perhaps even more, the acquiescence of Europeans in the Holocaust. In the semireligious formulation of this view, expiation of these sins can only come through an absolute benevolence toward the poor of the world whose suffering is claimed to be the result of the white race and its depredations. In practical terms this can only be accomplished through aid to Third World peoples and generous immigration policies that allow large numbers of people to escape the poverty of the Third World.”

As Roth says on page 445, if current trends continue much longer, the final outcome of these policies is predictable, and “by the end of the 21st century, in virtually all Western societies, white Europeans will find themselves minorities in their ancestral homelands. The motivations that drive these ideas and policies will be examined in the concluding section, but there can be no doubt as to the power of this elite ideology. This multicultural ideology is based on a huge distortion of history and is alien to the vast majority of citizens. It can only be maintained by ignoring the wishes of the majority and by increasingly coercive means to silence dissent. This coercion takes the form of insult and social ostracism in the United States, and in Europe it is supplemented by civil and criminal sanction against dissenters. This distinction may well evaporate if the United States Supreme Court comes to be dominated by people who accept the multicultural doctrine, an outcome that seems likely given the near unanimous liberal ideology of the major law schools and of the profession in general.”

He comments on how the EU suffers from a democratic deficit, since much of EU policy is determined by unelected bodies such as the Council of Ministers or the European Court of Justice and the European Commission, none of which are directly elected by the populace.

If the growing and perfectly legitimate demands for autonomy and the preservation of national cultures among European natives are not met, the alternative will be withdrawal from the EU, presaging the dissolution of the EU itself. One possibility is that Fascist-type movements may come to power, especially in those nations where Muslims make increasing demands for autonomy or indeed supremacy. The result may be the sort of ethnic civil strife that took place in Yugoslavia when the multiethnic society there broke down in the 1990s, only this time across much of the European continent. Why do European political leaders fail to anticipate these potentially catastrophic possibilities and respond by limiting immigration?

The Perils of Diversity, page 494-495:

“One possible explanation for these perverse policies that has been put forward by highly regarded scholars, such as Samuel Huntington, is that the current leadership of the EU is composed of left-wing authoritarians who are enemies of the Western liberal tradition. According to Huntington, ‘Multiculturalism is in its essence anti-European…’ and opposes its civilization. The official repression of dissent and pursuance of unpopular policies by undemocratic means suggests that such ideologues wish to turn the EU into a centrally controlled empire similar to the Soviet Union. If that is the case, then their current policies make a good deal of sense, in that they flood the continent with people who have lived under autocratic regimes and never lived in democratic republics. Such people may well be willing to tolerate repressive regimes provided they can maintain a moderate standard of living and their own traditional religious practices. As Huntington points out, imperial regimes often promote ethnic conflict among their minority citizens to strengthen the power of the central authority, with the not unrealistic claim that a powerful central authority is essential to maintain civil order.”

If this trend continues, much of Europe could be “transformed into an authoritarian and illiberal multiethnic empire, undemocratic, economically crippled and culturally retrograde.”

The Flemish journalist Paul Belien in 2006 interviewed the Russian-born intellectual Vladimir Bukovksy for the online magazine The Brussels Journal. Belien is also the author of A Throne in Brussels, in which he argues that the artificial state called Belgium has served as an inspiration for the EU itself. Bukovksy, a former Soviet dissident, fears that the European Union is on its way to becoming another Soviet Union, the Communist dictatorship that enslaved half of Europe before it imploded. In a speech he called the EU a “monster” that must be destroyed before it develops into a totalitarian state. As a young man he exposed the use of psychiatric imprisonment against political prisoners in the former USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 1917-1991) and spent twelve years in Soviet jails and labor camps.

The ultimate purpose of the Soviet Union was to create a new people and a new man. The same is true of the EU. Bukovksy states that “those who object to uncontrolled immigration from the Third World will be regarded as racist and those who oppose further European integration will be regarded as xenophobes.” When such artificial entities invariably collapse under the weight of their flawed, Utopian ideas, suppressed feelings of national identity may come bouncing back with a vengeance. “You can press a spring only that much, and the human psyche is very resilient you know. You can press it, you can press it, but don’t forget it is still accumulating a power to rebound. It is like a spring and it always goes to overshoot.”

In the EU, the European Parliament reminds Bukovksy of the Supreme Soviet, the largely powerless “parliament” which functioned as a rubber stamp for the Politburo. He thinks it looks like the Supreme Soviet because it was designed like it. Similarly, the European Commission looks like the Politburo, the unaccountable and unelected government that held the real power in the Soviet Union. In the EU the Commission — which, despite its boring and bureaucratic-sounding name, is an immensely powerful entity and the de facto government for half a billion people — is also unaccountable to anyone. EU corruption, in the same manner as its Soviet counterpart, flows from top to bottom rather than going from bottom to top.

Bukovksy warns that “There will be a collapse of the European Union pretty much like the Soviet Union collapsed. But do not forget that when these things collapse they leave such devastation that it takes a generation to recover. Just think what will happen if it comes to an economic crisis. The recrimination between nations will be huge. It might come to blows. Look to the huge number of immigrants from Third World countries now living in Europe. This was promoted by the European Union. What will happen with them if there is an economic collapse? We will probably have, like in the Soviet Union at the end, so much ethnic strife that the mind boggles. In no other country were there such ethnic tensions as in the Soviet Union, except probably in Yugoslavia. So that is exactly what will happen here, too. We have to be prepared for that. This huge edifice of bureaucracy is going to collapse on our heads.”

I could add here that as bad as the Communist countries were — and to get a glimpse of how bad it was there one can read The Gulag Archipelago by the Russian author Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn from the 1960s — they didn’t normally promote mass immigration of culturally alien peoples such as Africans or Muslims to their countries. The concept of championing non-European mass immigration as a matter of ideological principle first became official state policy in the USA in 1965, before the same thing happened in Western Europe. Many Multicultural ideas of “whiteness studies” or “white privilege,” where people of European origins are indoctrinated to hate themselves, or busing of non-whites to white schools, were initially developed in North America and then exported from there to Europe and Australia.

The phrase “Political Correctness” first came into use under Communism and meant simply that all ideas must conform to and support the agenda of the Communist movement. History and philosophy were the first to be forced into line, but as is clear from the career of the biologist Trofim Lysenko, science was also made to conform. Those who dissented from the ideas of the Communist doctrine were judged to be psychologically imbalanced and confined to mental institutions. Today the ruling ideology of the intellectuals is an absolute egalitarianism which recognizes no idea, art or historical analysis as better than any other.

Roth again, page 507:

“It argues that all histories are narratives fabricated for some class or race advantage. Many argue that even science is corrupted by its patriarchal and European roots and serves to justify the subjugation of one group by another. This all-encompassing egalitarianism gives rise to a nihilistic relativism in which no cultural value or practice is better or worse than any other, and to suggest otherwise is to be intolerant of human difference and demonstrate an unwillingness to show due respect to the other, to illegitimately privilege certain groups, ideas, and artistic works above others… The greatest sin in this prevailing orthodoxy is to question the absolute equality of all humans and human groups. From the noble idea that all men are equal in the eyes of God and should therefore be treated as equals under the laws of man, the modern multiculturalist insists that all men are, in fact, equal in all ways, and all cultures equally worthy in all respects. This, of course, was the fatal error that Aristotle saw would undermine democracy, namely: that since men are equal in some regard, they are therefore equal in all regards.”

This prevailing extreme egalitarianism also induces a profound nihilism; if all things are equal then no value, moral code or standard of behavior is better than any other. Page 508:

“This is, of course, the foundation upon which the cult of multiculturalism is based. It explains the paralyzing ambivalence of Western societies about immigrant assimilation and tolerance of the maintenance of alien traditions. A specific problem for Europe is that it welcomes Muslim immigrants, and Muslims categorically reject this view, correctly recognizing its nihilism, and see it as far inferior to their own faith and the way of life it prescribes. Whether Western elites really believe these things is less important than the benefit they gain from its promulgation. The primary benefit is that it paralyses the popular preferences for national preservation by characterizing opposition to elite doctrines as immoral, indecent, and inhumane. It allows unelected elites to aggrandize their own power by obliterating national sovereignty and nullifying democratic accountability. Many are, without exaggeration, true totalitarians that have no regard for the well-being of those they control, since the only way they can consolidate their dystopian plans is through brute state power. While there is no doubt that many well-meaning individuals join their efforts, they are the sort of ‘useful idiots’ who excused and covered up Communist atrocities during most of the 20th century.”

In the author’s view, the only possible way to avoid the extremely negative outcomes outlined above is an immediate and complete moratorium on any further mass immigration to the West, yet he thinks that this currently constitutes a remote possibility. It would not be remote if modern democracies truly reflected the wishes of their citizens regarding immigration, since such a change of policy would be supported by overwhelming majorities in Western nations. It would also be extremely beneficial in both economic and cultural terms. Roth, page 509:

“However, a major limitation of immigration is a remote possibility because the elites and the special interests that control all the major institutions in Western societies would strongly resist any such change. The history of the past three decades makes it clear that they will not be moved by popular sentiment unless faced by a very unlikely set of circumstances which threaten their own positions of power. It would require a popular revolt of enormous proportions against the existing order. Under present circumstances the problems outlined above are unlikely to create such a revolt, for the simple reason that the population is intentionally denied, by the government and all the major media, the knowledge and information that would enable them to fully comprehend the inevitable long-term consequence of current policies. This ignorance is reinforced by the legal and social repression of any individual willing to voice opposition to those policies. The only way the public could be moved to a major reaction against current policies would be events of such a catastrophic nature that they would force an increase in the saliency of the costs of current policies to almost everyone and demonstrate the need for immediate action.”

Perhaps the most likely threat to the elites’ grip on power would be a serious financial meltdown causing a severe economic depression throughout the Western world. The near-panicked response between 2008 and 2010 of most governments in the West to the financial crisis indicates to Byron M. Roth that many of them recognize the dangers they face if this situation should grow much worse than it is today. “The massive spending and government intervention in response to the 2008 downturn is unprecedented and suggests that the characterization of governmental responses as panicked is not unreasonable.” Page 512:

“That such a nightmare might be necessary to reverse Western immigration policies that, in the long run, promise the demise of Western civilization, is a great tragedy. All of which would be unnecessary if elites adopted more sensible approaches to immigration and more prudent fiscal policies. It is difficult to decide, on reflection, whether the enormous human pain of such a depression would be worth the advantage of a reversal of current policies. The dilemma is moot, since such a nightmare scenario seems very unlikely, and the current downturn will probably be turned around without major unrest. In that case, things will continue on their current course with all the negative consequences outlined above. Sometime during the last half of the 21st century the world will be very different from it is today. China will undoubtedly be the world’s dominant power and will likely bring all of Asia into its orbit. Islam will become the most common religion in the world with considerably more adherents than Christianity or any other religion. Relations between Europe and the Muslim Middle East may be one of fairly constant low-level conflict, especially, as is likely, if Muslim countries develop nuclear arms and mass immigration to Europe continues.”

This is one of the few instances where I seriously disagree with Mr. Roth. The French writer Guillaume Faye predicts a real collapse at some point between 2010 and 2020. I am tempted to agree with him. I don’t think the current political and economic order in the Western world is stable at all. On the contrary, I suspect we are fast approaching a serious historical discontinuity that will sweep aside today’s suicidal liberalism. It’s a house of cards that will collapse as soon as the geopolitical tectonic plates make a sudden shift, which they will.

My personal opinion is that the euro as a currency probably won’t exist a few years from now, and may well take the European Union down with it. I view this as a desirable outcome since the EU constitutes a primary engine behind the ongoing destruction of European civilization and the peoples who created it. I also cannot see how the escalating debt crisis in the USA can be resolved without social unrest of some kind. Frankly, I will not be surprised at all if the rising tensions we are witnessing, and episodes such as the Muhammad cartoon Jihad in 2006, will by future historians be viewed as early skirmishes in an impending world war, triggered by the implosion of the Western world order. If we are lucky, out of the ashes will emerge a new generation of European civilization, with a different mythology and concept of morality.

Haven't got a goat? Stab your neighbor instead......

2010-11-24T09:45:00.000-08:00

TUNISIA: KARIOUAN; OVER 60 STABBINGS ON DAY OF EID

(ANSAmed) - TUNIS, NOVEMBER 22 - On the day of Eid, knives were not used only for the traditional slaughter of rams, but also in a series of bloody attacks in areas surrounding the central Tunisian holy city of Kairouan. This is according to the French language weekly Tunis Ebdo, which reports that over 60 people were treated for stab wounds in the accident emergency unit at Kairouan's hospital on November 16.

The newspaper says that the incidents were the result of bad blood often caused by heavy alcohol consumption. Although Islam forbids it, there is a growing number of alcohol consumers in the country. (ANSAmed).

Swiss Monument Against Minarets

2010-11-16T13:08:00.000-08:00

Horrific Pictures From the Muslim Genocide on Christians in Iraq

2010-11-04T16:32:00.000-07:00

STOP MUSLIM PERSECUTION AND WHOLESALE SLAUGHTER OF CHRISTIANS IN IRAQ

Atlas Shrugs

On October 21, Muslims seized a church in Iraq, and kidnapped and slaughtered scores of righteous souls. We are witnessing the same annihilation of Coptic Christians in Egypt by Muslims as well.

Amir wrote me,
Pamela, Take a look at what the Muslims doing to the Christian in Iraq everyday. Over 80 people were beheaded in a single day during a Sunday mass. The youngest one were a 4 months old baby that was beheaded front of her parents and throw the head at her mom. Can you please please please help us? We need a strong voice like yours. God bless.

I urge Canadian Atlas readers to march against Islamic supremacism and murder of non-Muslims. Stand up and fight back.

Christians to hold peaceful demonstration in Toronto against persecution of Christians in Iraq

Please join this peaceful Christian demonstration in Downtown Toronto on this Saturday.

November 6th, 2010 at 1:00pm

Where: meeting place….. - Corner of Yonge & Front

Directions: From Yonge |Street and Front TO House of Parliament-City Hall

Canada Condemns Attack in Baghdad Church(No. 349 - November 1, 2010 - 4:15 p.m. ET)
The Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement condemning the October 31 terrorist attack in Baghdad:“Canada condemns Sunday’s terrorist attack on worshippers at Baghdad’s Church of Our Lady of Salvation. On behalf of all Canadians, I offer my deepest sympathy to the families and friends of those killed, and wish a full and rapid recovery to the injured.

“We condemn in the strongest terms those who would conduct such a cowardly, vicious and senseless attack on innocent civilians in a place of worship”

Helen Thomas: a Jew-hater till the very end

2010-10-12T11:32:00.000-07:00

You cannot criticize Israel in this country and survive,' former White House correspondent says

Why would you criticize Israel if you don't want to destroy it?

Associated Press

MARION, Ohio — In a radio interview, former White House correspondent Helen Thomas acknowledges she touched a nerve with remarks about Israel that led to her retirement. But she says the comments were "exactly what I thought," even though she realized soon afterward that it was the end of her job.

"I hit the third rail. You cannot criticize Israel in this country and survive," Thomas told Ohio station WMRN-AM in a sometimes emotional 35-minute interview that aired Tuesday. It was recorded a week earlier by WMRN reporter Scott Spears at Thomas' Washington, D.C., condominium.

Al Qaeda Unhappy About Helen Thomas's Firing

Thomas, 90, stepped down from her job as a columnist for Hearst News Service in June after a rabbi and independent filmmaker videotaped her outside the White House calling on Israelis to get "out of Palestine." She gave up her front row seat in the White House press room, where she had aimed often pointed questions at 10 presidents, going back to Eisenhower.

She has kept a low profile since then.

"(It was) very hard for the first two weeks. After that, I came out of my coma," Thomas said.

Rabbi David Nesenoff, who runs the website rabbilive.com, said he approached Thomas after he'd been at the White House for Jewish Heritage Day on May 27. He asked whether she had any comments on Israel.

"Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine," she replied.

'If Not for Islam, Europe Would Have Remained in Total Darkness'

2010-10-06T05:15:00.000-07:00

Sometimes you wanna scream

If not for Islamic headbangers, we could live in peace and do something better than educate people about a 7th century mass-murdering pedophile & slave trader:

Sheik of Al-Azhar Ahmad Al-Tayyeb Draws Comparison between Bloody Crusades and Western Colonialism; 'If Not for Islam, Europe Would Have Remained in Total Darkness'

MEMRI

Ahmad Al-Tayyeb: "There is no doubt that the Western Church, at a certain point in time, was paving the way for colonialism, or was being used by colonialism, to accomplish the goal of colonialism in the East. Therefore, the phenomenon of proselytism – or even the phenomenon of orientalism into which it later developed – followed in the footsteps of colonialism. [...]

"If you turn to Islam, you will not find such a thing. Throughout history, no Muslims ever set out to a country and forced its people [to convert], or enticed them to do so, by means of money, gifts, jobs, and so on, in preparation for the Islamic army to occupy that country. The reason is that in Islamic teachings, law, and jurisprudence, there is no such thing as forcing a country to covert. [...]

"Why were the Crusades waged against the Muslims? They claimed that the Muslims were infidels, and that Jesus had appeared to them, telling them to save the grave from which he had been resurrected from the infidels. Jesus did not say this, God forbid. The truth is that there were interests involved. At the time, Europe was more barbaric than anything else. They said that they had benefited from the Crusades: 'We learned from the East when we colonized these countries.'

"They embarked on colonialism in our region at that period. They captured 3,000 Muslims in Acre. The Muslims surrendered, and it is well known that when a prisoner surrenders – that's it. Even though they promised the Muslims not to kill them if they surrendered, they killed them, down to the very last one, in a single day. Some historians say that the horses' legs were submerged in Muslim blood. Nevertheless, that period ended when the Crusaders were vanquished. This happened only when the Islamic nation in the East was unified by Saladin.

"I draw a comparison between this and modern history – how Muslim disunity enables the Western armies to colonized Muslim countries, and how unity can vanquish them within a very short period of time. [...]

"The meaning of Jihad for the sake of Allah is defense. Are you familiar with the Ministry of Defense? That is the jihad. You will not find mention of initiating the fighting in any Koranic verse. What you will find is fighting to confront fighting. [...]

"If an enemy enters the country, everybody must confront him. Other than that, jihad should be a collective duty, not an individual one. Collective duty means that the Ministry of Defense is in charge, and it assembles the country's army. The issue of war is not left up to individuals. This is one of the things that are not left up to individuals, and if a person is involved in this, it is forbidden and he should be confronted. [...]

"The weapons that are manufactured are not used in the West. They are not used in America or Europe. Markets and centers of tension are created in order to put these weapons to use. If you think that what I say is strange, show me a single war zone in America, Europe, or even Japan or Australia, which can be compared to the war raging for 50 years in Palestine, and the wars in Afghanistan, Somalia, and, of course, Iraq, and only God knows where the next war zone will be. All this is happening..."

Reporter: "We have turned into Dar Al-Harb ['House of War']."

Ahmad Al-Tayyeb: "Yes, this Dar Al-Harb was imposed upon us. They imposed upon us wars that we have nothing to do with. They determine which areas will go up in flames, so that they can export their weapons and take our money. They sell us death. [...]

"It is my claim that if not for Islam and the culture of Islam, Europe would have remained in total darkness to this day. It is [Islam] that awakened it. Our culture can be found in Andalusia and in Rome. All that art was brought by the Muslims. If not for Muslims' civilization, Europe would not be Europe and, consequently, America would not be America. [...]

"Today, there are clear and tangible calls for the Shiitization of Sunni youth. [...]

"Today, there is a kind of... I call it [Shiite] invasion." [...]

Free Yourself of Islam!

2010-09-08T04:57:00.001-07:00

A convincing argument:

MUSLIMS ARE LIKE DOGS……

2010-09-03T18:34:00.000-07:00

……except Muslims use mosques instead of urine to mark their territory.

Thanks to Barenaked Islam

The Intelligence of Dogs gives us the classical explanation of this myth: “All canines use urine … to mark the limits of their territories. In males this marking behavior is usually accompanied by leg lifting to direct the urine against large objects (trees, rocks, bushes) to place the scent at nose height for other dogs and to allow the scent to radiate over a large area. Some African wild dogs … scrabble as high up the trunk of a tree as possible before squirting their message.”

[Muslims use mosques to mark their conquests. In Muslim males, this marking behavior is usually accompanied by leg lifting against large objects (buildings in Manhattan, temples in Jerusalem, churches in Egypt, temples in India, etc.) to allow the structure to be seen from as wide an area as possible.]

First of all, dogs urinate far beyond the boundaries or limits of their so-called territory. Dogs don’t just urinate on large objects, but on vertical objects (trees, posts), unfamiliar or inorganic objects (tires, plastic bags, fire hydrants), and on top of another dog’s urine (males usually urinate on top of another male’s scent, but not on top of a female’s).

[Muslims mosquefy an area far beyond the boundaries of decency and sensitivity. Muslims don't just leave their mark on large objects but on vertical objects as well (high rise buildings), and on top of infidel burial sites (Ground Zero)]

Is this $100 million mosque at Ground Zero a sign of America’s tolerance, or is it a sign of Muslim conquest?

The past may hold answers:

The past may hold answers:
In 630, Muhammad led 10,000 Muslim soldiers into Mecca and turned the pagans’ most prominent spot, the Ka’aba, into the Masjid al-Haram Mosque.
In 634, Rightly Guided Caliph Umar conquered Syria and turned the Christians’ most prominent spot, the Church of Job, famous for being visited by Saint Silva in the fourth century, into the Mosque of Job.
In 637, Caliph Umar conquered Hebron and turned the second-most prominent spot in Judaism, the Cave of the Patriarchs, into the Ibrahimi Mosque. (This was repeated by Saladin in 1188.)
In 638, Muslim generals Amr ibn al-As and Khalid ibn al-Walid conquered Gaza and turned the prominent fifth-century Byzantine church into the Great Mosque of Gaza.
In 638, Caliph Umar conquered Jerusalem. In 691, Caliph Al-Malik ordered the Dome of the Rock built on the most prominent spot in Judaism, the Temple Mount, followed by Caliph Al-Walid building the Al-Aqsa Mosque there in 705.
In 651, Muslims conquered Persia and turned Zoroastrian temples in Bukhara and Istakhr into mosques.
In 706, after Muslims took Damascus from the Byzantine Empire, Caliph Al-Walid turned the prominent Orthodox Church of St. John the Baptist into the Umayyad Mosque.
In 710, Gen. Muhammad bin Qasim conquered Pakistan, defiled the prominent Sun Temple in Multan, which house the great idol “sanam,” and erected a mosque.
In 784, after the conquest of Spain, Emir Abd ar-Rahman turned the prominent Visigothic Christian Church of Saint Vincent into the Great Aljama Mosque of Cordoba.
After the conquest of Egypt, Caliphs al-Mamun (813-833) and al-Hakim (996–1021) turned prominent Coptic Christian churches and Jewish synagogues in Cairo into mosques.
In 831, Muslims conquered Palermo, Sicily, and Asad ibn al-Furat turned the prominent Church of Saint Mary of the Assumption into the Great Mosque of Bal’harm.
In 1193, Muslims conquered Delhi, India, and Qutbuddin Aibak turned the Red Citadel in Dhillika, the most prominent spot of the last Hindu rulers, into the Qutb Minar Mosque.
From 1250-1517, Mamluk Muslims controlled the Golan Heights and used the ancient Synagogue of Katzrin as a mosque.
In 1387, Turkish Muslims conquered Thessaloniki and turned the Katholikon Monastery and the Church of Aghia Sophia, which housed the relics of Saint Gregorios Palamas, into mosques, as Symeon of Thessaloniki recorded:
“The greatest number of the buildings of the churches fell to them, of which the first was the Holy Church of the Savior. … These were trampled underfoot and the infidels rejoiced in them. … Most of the religious buildings in the city were despoiled, while altars were demolished and sacred things profaned.”
On May 29, 1453, Sultan Mehmet II conquered Constantinople and turned the great Byzantine church, Hagia Sophia, into the Ayasofya Mosque. The largest church in Christendom for a thousand years, the church’s four acres of gold mosaics were covered with whitewash and Quran verses.
In 1458, Sultan Mehmet II conquered Athens and turned the Greeks’ most prominent spot, the Parthenon on Acropolis hill, into a mosque. When Venetian Gen. Francesco Morosini drove the Muslims out in 1687, a cannonball hit the gunpowder stored in the mosque, blowing it up.
In the 15th century, Ottoman invaders turned Saint Clement’s Macedonian Orthodox Monastery in Plaosnik, Balkans, into the Imater Mosque.
From 1519-1858, Muslim Mughal rulers gained control of India and turned over 2,000 Hindu temples into mosques, including demolishing the Temple of Ram Janmabhoomi in Ayodhya, the birthplace of Rama, and replacing it with the Babri Mosque.
India’s Mughal Muslim ruler, Jahangir (1605-1627), wrote in Tujuk-i-Jahangiri:
“At the city of Banaras [was] a temple. … I made it my plea for throwing down the temple … and on the spot, with the very same materials, I erected the great mosque.”
In 1543, Hayreddin Barbarossa’s 30,000 Muslim troops wintered in Toulon, France, and turned the prominent Toulon Cathedral into a mosque.
In 1570, under Sultan Selim II Khan, Muslims conquered Paphos, Cyprus, and Gov. Mehmet Bey Ebubkir turned the prominent Christian church into the Great Mosque of Paphos.
In 1571, Muslims invaded Famagusta, Cyprus, and turned Saint Nicolas Cathedral, a rare Gothic church, into the Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque, and Saint Sophia Cathedral in Nicosia, constructed in 1228, into the Selimiye Mosque.
In 1588, Sultan Murat III turned the Eastern Orthodox Church of Saint John the Forerunner in Constantinople into the Hirami Ahmet Pasha Mosque.
In 1781, after having conquered the Old City of Acre, Ottoman Muslims turned the Roman Catholic church built by Crusaders into the Jezzar Ahmet Pasha Mosque, where a hair from Muhammad’s beard is preserved.
In 1923, Muslims expelled Greeks from Turkey and turned Orthodox churches into mosques.
In World War II, Nazis allied with Bosnians and turned the prominent Artists’ Gallery Museum in Zagreb, Croatia, into a mosque.
In the 1950s, Muslims expelled Jews from Arab lands and turned synagogues into mosques.
Algerian Muslims warred against French colonial rule till France pulled out in 1962, after which the Cathedral of St. Philippe was turned into the Ketchaoua Mosque. Violence against Jews caused 30,000 to flee and the Great Synagogue of Oran was turned into the Mosque Abdellah Ben Salem.
In 1974, Turkish Muslims invaded northern Cyprus, and prominent Greek Orthodox churches were turned into mosques.
In 1981, Muslim immigrants to the Netherlands converted Amsterdam’s historic Catholic Sint-Ignatiuskerk into the Fatih Mosque, and a synagogue in The Hague into the Aksa Mosque.
On Sept. 11, 2001, Muslim terrorists attacked the most prominent spot in America, the World Trade Center. In less than 10 years, the number of mosques in New York City has skyrocketed to over 140.WND H/T Susan
RELATED STORIES:
muslims-build-mosques-as-permanent-symbols-of-their-victories-over-infidels