Doesn't it make sense that Europe and the Near East have close economic and political ties?

Posted by: kilash at November 25, 2004 5:47 PM

"Stephen Crittenden: Where do you think this is all going?

Bat Ye’or: It is going to disaster, because either Europe will become the new continent of dhimmitude or there will be a very savage xenophobic movement, because this immigration was not integrated properly, it happened too quickly."

My guess is the latter. Europeans will kill or expell everything that moves. Europe will become one, large bloodbath in the near future.

I find it strange to see that even she talks about "bridging our differences". I have no intention of bridging anything with Islam. We're right. They're wrong. Period. There can be no dialogue with Islam. Ever.

Posted by: Ali Dashti at November 25, 2004 5:54 PM

No dialogue... ever? Then what? A bitter unwinnable war with about a billion believers? The more we demonize a group of people, the more likely we can justify atrocities against them.

Posted by: kilash at November 25, 2004 6:59 PM

Thank you Waterdragon for bringing this interview to Mr. Spencer's attention. Thank you Mr. Spencer for posting this interview. I am looking forward immensely to purchasing Ms. Ye'or's book.

Kilash:

The majority of Muslims don't like Western civilization; when you immigrate to our countries, the first thing that you think of is how to destroy us and bring us the "peace of Islam". I am sorry Kilash but what do you think will be the result of such an attitude on the part of Muslims? Do you think that we in the West will be grateful to have our civilization attacked? I am very sorry Kilash but 1492 will repeat itself. Muslims will be driven from all of the Western countries where they are causing trouble.

You are so naive Kilash. Do you think Westerners are stupid? We are very tolerant and willing to give the benefit of the doubt to people for a very long time but WE ARE NOT STUPID. Why do you think we are at the top of the pecking order? Why is it that the entire Arab world, if it were not for oil, is an economic train wreck waiting to happen? Kilash, we are not even pissed off yet. When one of you Mobots manages to set off a WMD in a port city or some other similarly sinister deed, then we will deal with you. Then, we will crush you into the dirt. You will taste the ashes of despair, of defeat as you have never tasted them. Your precious moon god will not protect you from our wrath and we will crush you utterly!

Posted by: Admiral Don Juan at November 25, 2004 7:26 PM

It's true, demonisation can be bad and there are plenty of historical examples, e.g. Jews in Europe, Vietnamese during the Vietnam war, Cathars in Medeval Europe etc. Now, however, I fear that the collective guilt for previous demonisation has made us overly sensitive to a serious threat, islam. I mean, take a look around the world, Nigeria, Ivory Coast, India, Thailand. Buddhists, Hindu's, Christians and the few remaining real heathens have the same problem, islam. We don't have any problems with Hindu's, Buddhists or Jews in Europe. The tenets of islam just make it virtually impossible to coexist in peace. I also think it's fair to be able to live in a certain degree of harmony in ones own country and not have to take account of no-go zones etc. or hear muslims tell us to wait until they're in the majority. I want nothing to do with islam, don't want to visit islamic states in the middle east and don't want my Europe becoming some islamic colony. And by the way for the Americans out there I completely disagree with the oft-used suggestion that Europeans are oblivious to the islamic threat and America knows whats going on. I think the average European is much more on the know about the dark side of islam and unfortunately our good nature and geographic proximity to sources of islamic migrants have allowed the extremely unfortunate inundation of muslims into Europe.

Posted by: Arhopala at November 25, 2004 7:28 PM

"The more we demonize a group of people, the more likely we can justify atrocities against them."

You mean like Muslims calling non-Muslims "dirty infidels"? If so, you are quite correct.

Posted by: Ali Dashti at November 25, 2004 7:39 PM

KILASH-

The members of the Muslim community who want to survive their own in-house, Koran-slinging, knife-weilding fanatics need to use their religion's Sufi sense of the faith- as poetic, ironic and open to humane interpretation and not a mere frozen dogmatic intellectual despotism- or they will suffer -should radical Islam succeeed- under its planetary tyranny themselves as strict as Stalin's, Mao's or Pol Pot's. A five continent 'killing field' for all who do not kowtow to the latest mad mullah's proclamations ("Kill all black dogs, or be beheaded yourself!" one week, and "Collector's of any Art showing the human form must be drowned like swine!" the next... ad absurdum...) Although such a world-terror state would be somewhat longer-lasting, because the Communist-style maniacs merely had a man-made credo to back up their dark dreams of global conquest and dominion. Islam's tenets allow its unquestioned lunatics to quote a 'God' (an incontestable 'source', especially in Islam), not merely the unholy human trinity Marx, Engels and Lenin. Humans are fallible, but no 'God' ever is. The 'secular' (Christian, Taoist, Confucian, Shintoist, Buddhist, Hindu, Bahai, agnostic, etc.) world will not put up with a return to the age of religious warfare (only recently ended in Europe among its Protestant vs Catholic vs Orthodox sects), so the members of Islam need to reform themselves, or face a very strong, very hostile union of nations- with Science, humor and infinite cunning on their side. And no restraints if challenged for its freedom of thought, conscience and their essentially unchained, Enlightment-born soul. The West (and all who accept its root Renaissance concepts, viz- China, Japan, India, etc.) has its own vision and will not accept having its 'eyes' (secular law) plucked out to please a desert warlord who thought he heard a Jewish angel say "Kill." "Temper the faith's violence, or be plunged into the fundamentalist maelstrom" would be my advice. Just as Christians do not cheer on those extremists on the deranged edges their ranks who shoot abortion providers,(but jail them as murderers) Muslims need to reign in their own psychopathic fringe, or go down with them.

Posted by: profitsbeard at November 25, 2004 7:46 PM

I don't have much to say, so I'll repeat the same old thing: If we don't take remedial action soon, the Human population will bifurcate, splitting between the world of the civilized and the world of Islam; that the Islamic world cannot feed itself today, much less tomorrow, and that if we simply turn our backs on the islamic world, a billion people will starve to death in three weeks; and that if we in the West have any morality worth having it is imperative that we intervene to stop the extermination fo those people, most of whom are children. If we do nothing, the time will surely come that we will indeed do something, and the Islamic world will be a diorama in the sand, a strange toy to look at with awed wonder, a museum of a vanished people.

I'll repeat this too: that if we don't stop Islam now, if we wait till it is intolerable, if we lash out and kill like mad beasts, the dead will bloat across the Earth, and their bodies will kill the rest of us because we simply won't be able to bury them fast enough.

I urge all of us to act in unison, with focus, to engage the threat concretely before there is no hope but to run madly through the streets with pitchforks and torches and hunting down anyone who looks different, who might have belonged to the ACLU, who could be a Sikh but let's not take the chance.

We know the Moslems kill. We have to confront them on their own terms with our sophistication and outwit them, beat them, turn them back, and conquer them. I don't want to be part of either alternative, Eurabia or genocide. If we won't act to the best of our abilities, we are less than the Moslems. I think of Yeates:

"The best lack all conviction
While the worst are filled with passionate intensity."

We must be better than that.

Posted by: sonofwalker at November 25, 2004 9:30 PM

"You are so naive Kilash."

Yes, to believe that the Christian America could follow Jesus and turn the other cheek.

"WE ARE NOT STUPID"

So why did the US invade Iraq? A war it won't possibly win. The US is basically alone, the civilised global community never was behind invading in Iraq, those Western technological giants, like Germany or France saw it for the futile conflict it was.

You don't win hearts by giving people democratic freedom by a bullet or bomb. It was the sanctions that really hurt the Iraqi people, America and the UN Security COuncil had been terrorising Iraqi women and children by stopping vaccines because Saddam might (maybe, highly unlikely) use them for warfare.

Why didn't people care when Iraqi children were dying? Where is America in the Sudan? Why does America still possess so many nuclear weapons if they are so terrible to have.

In my own city, an American tore down a sign that freely demonstrated a person's feelings on George Bush. So much for freedom of speech.

Posted by: kilash at November 25, 2004 9:55 PM

Kilash:

Actually, you may be surprised to hear that I agree with you on the topic of Iraq. I think that Western nations should get out of all Muslim countries, cut off all aid to Muslim countries, cut off all economic and social contacts with Muslim countries, ban all Muslim immigration, deport as many Muslims as possible, throw the rest in concentration camps and then build barriers as per Israel and let you Muslims stew in your own juice.

FOAD

Posted by: Admiral Don Juan at November 25, 2004 10:19 PM

So Big Nose de Gaulle screwed up Europe too, did he? He's responsible for Quebec being so obsessed with separation, after he spouted those infamous words "Vive le Quebec libre!" from the balcony of the Montreal city hall back in the 60's. What a walking talking disaster he turned out to be. Yet another reason to dislike the French.

Posted by: feralee at November 25, 2004 10:28 PM

Bat Ye'or's full text needs to be read, and allowances made for English that is not that of a native speaker. But the most important thing will be to read her book, when it comes out in a few months, to see the entire web of secret agreements and understandings by which a disastrous French policy, based on a wilful ignoring of its own experts in Islam (many of the best had retired, or died, and the others were silenced by a large, well-connected, and altoghether ruthless pro-Arab and pro-Muslim lobby, consisting of those who stood to benefit directly from the recycling of petrodollars -- one of them, of course, is now the President of France. Andreotti was another. Smaller fry include all those arms salesmen, sellers of houses and messuage in London and the Home Counties, purveyors of prostitutes, and the whole crew of ex-diplomats and journalists and hangers-on and fixers -- so many, many willing quislings among them, who never stopped a minute to consider what they were doing, and would not have cared if they had stopped.

So with France in the lead, having first allowed in the harkis, Arabs in Algeria who had sided with France and were offered refuge lest there be retribution against them, then started to allow, in a major way, non-harkis, other Arabs as cheap labor. At first the migrants were limited to single men. They lived in groups. They threw stones at passersby (I was one of those passersby). They engaged in criminal activities. It was decided, Giscard d'Estaing did the deciding, that perhaps if they were allowed to bring their wives, or women, with them, their criminal behavior would diminish. A plausible idea. The wife, the wives, the children came. The wives gave birth, and again, and again. Families of 8, 10, 12, 16 children, by two or three wives. All on the dole. It has been happening for 30 years. Now, though the French will not release the figures, there are those who work in the right Ministries and privately confide the terrible truth: 1 out of every 3 babies now born in France is born to a Muslim family. Do a calculation: in 20 years, 1 out of every 3 20-year-olds in France will be Muslim. And in 30 years? 40? What will happen to France, if even now, with 10% of the population, the Muslims have terrified the entire political class. What will happen to the Jews and those who are still believing Christians? To the Hindus and Vietnamese Buddhists? To the Maronites who sought refuge in France, once their support? To the sculpture and paintings all over France, that are considered haram, prohibited? No one gave this much thought.

And in Germany, it was believed that the Turks were stolid, hardworking, and of course they came out, so everyone assured everyone else, "secularist" Turkey. No one realised that Islam as a belief-system never dies, and that Turks abroad found, out of homesickness, defensiveness, whatever, a renewed fervency in their faith (except for the handful who abandoned, as some "maghrebins laiques" in France have abandoned, Islam altogether -- but this very small group, of those who begin to think, are slim consolation for the problem that remains).

And France, and then Germany, helped lure the smaller countries into a similar policy. Each had its own contributing Muslim groups: in England it was Pakistanis, in Italy Libyans and Egyptians and Somalis; in Spain Moroccans; in France Algerians; in Holland Moroccans and Indonesians and Surinamese; in Belgium, Moroccans and Algerians. In America, a little of each -- but America is further away, and offers fewer benefits, and has a population that is, for all sorts of historic reasons, far less inclined to welcome Islam, and far readier to learn what it has to learn, about the tenets of this belief-system, so that it alone is likely to save itself -- as long as the Da'wa is held in check, by a vigilent campaign that nowhere gives an inch, and publicizes widely every trick and device of that same Da'wa. A country can be Muslim-friendly, and pay the price, or be Muslim-hostile (it need not be by government fiat, but by the actions of citizens who are consumers and employers and citizens careful to oppose all measures taken by the silly meninos of this world), and save itself. The E.U. bureaucracy has been completely infiltrated by those who wish to promote Arab and Muslim aims, and their abandonment of Israel reflects this, but is hardly the end of the matter.

In the end, the 85% of the world's population that is not Muslim is going to have to come to grips with what that belief-system is all about -- one should carefully avoid calling it a religion, because the word "religion" automatically commands respect, and forecloses strict scrutiny. And strict scrutiny of Islam, both as a belief-system, and as its adherents have acted out that belief-system over 1350 years, in Jihad-conquest and then in subjugating non-Muslims to a status of humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity that is summed up in the word dhimmitude, must be constantly exercised. For Islam limits human freedom, and supplies a Total Regulation of the Universe that, as Ibn Warraq has shown, is identical, in all major respects, to Fascism as a system. When you are against Islam, you are against Fascism. That this is not understood, that the imams are not seen as the blackshirts and brownshirts of today, is simply based on mingled confusion, denial, and above all, anxiety that prevents clarity of analysis.

Above some transparent apologist for Islam, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, wishes that the Americans leave Iraq, and also asks "what about the Sudan?" Indeed. Let America leave Iraq, let Sunnis and Shi'a fight it out -- what do we care as long as the country has been disarmed and permanent vigilance will be exercised to keep it largely disarmed? We do not have a stake in "democracy" in the Muslim countries because this will not automatically lead to a lessening of hatred of Infidels, nor a lessening of the idea of Jihad -- in fact, all de-islamization efforts have come not from democracies, but from enlightened despots such as Ataturk. From our point of view, constant turmoil and internal dissension in the Muslim countries is greatly to be desired -- as long as they cannot get their hands on the kinds of stockpiles of weapons, and engage in the kind of weapons acquisition, that was idiotically permitted over the past 30 years. A. Q. Khan should have been stopped in his tracks -- and could have been. And would have been, had the right people, people who were informed about Islam, been making and executing policy. The Western world has, when it comes to Islam, been led by the nose by all those Prince Bandars and those who receive the largesse of him and his ilk. What can one make of the kind of people -- Carter, Brzezinski, Gary Sick -- who not only did nothing to prevent the resistible rise of Khomeini, but actually seemed to find nothing at all wrong with him, Carter even calling him a man "of faith" just like himself. Yes, just like himself. We cannot take another Carter -- not here, not anywhere. Nor a Brzezinski, nor a Sick. Nor in France a Chirac or Dominique de Villepin. Other people, saner and harder and more cunning, need to be brought in, and the others jettisoned, or quietly defanged. There are plenty of Alger Hisses to go around -- people who seem to think that the mixture as before, with apologists for Islam making policy (see the remarks of Peter Berchtold, apparently the head of the Foreign Policy Institute's Middle East training, made a few days ago at the meeting of MESA, overwhelmingly -- by his own count only 50 of 1500 members of MESA seemed to favor a policy of confrontation with Jihadists, in Iraq and elsewhere. That there is hardly a college or university, therefore, where one can begin to learn the truth about Islam, is a scandal. That someone is still in the State Department, and still feels perfectly free to reassure the witches' sabbath of academic fifth columnists, and is still "training" others for the State Department, is extraordinary.

One wonders what people in the State Department actually know about Islam? What do those who are now covering Western Europe, including Holland and France, make of it? Are they happy with the advice being given by the apologists at the MIddle Eastern desks? Or would they like to see a little realism, and some help extended to Geert Wilders, and others in Europe trying to undo the damage of the Chiracs and the Andreottis and the D.deV's. It is not "the State Department" that is the problem, but particualr people who can be identified, isolated, and forced to resign, who are the problem. That should be a major task of all those who investigate and write about the "trouble at State."

Yes, get out of Iraq. And since the poster above asks about Sudan, there is an answer there. It has been given before at this website. A few thousand marines could seize all of the southern Sudan and Darfur. The populations would be delirious with gratitude. The places would be secured, and held, until a referendum on independence from the Muslim Arab north could be held. Nothing, absolutely nothing, will ever come from the U.N., as John Danforth is discovering. But a free southern and western Sudan, economically viable (the oil is in the south), would have many advantages. Instead of sullen Iraqis, hating the Infidels even if they are willing to pocket everything we do for them, there will be smiling black faces, and one doubts that the "Muslims" of Darfur will want, after their treatment, to stay Muslim very long. Egypt's eye on the Sudan, and its desire to move south to threaten Ethiopia when the latter starts to divert, for its irrigation projects, and as it has every right to do, headwaters of the Nile, will be foiled. And America, which will not have those bases it naively believed it might obtain in Iraq, can safely ensconce its forces not in Iraq, nor in hateful Saudi Arabia, but in the southern Sudan, from which both North Africa and the Middle East are easily reached. Much safer, and a blow to the Jihad, and a boost for black African Christians, who have been feeling somewhat abandoned. For when the British did nothing to help the Ibo during the Biafra War of 1967-69, which as Col. Ojukwu said was fought agaisnt the "Jihad" from the Muslim north (that north was aided by Egyptian pilots who wantonly bombed Ibo villages and killed tens of thousands of villagers), that was one blow. The French have behaved similarly in the Ivory Coast, attempting to force the Ivoirians to accept the Muslim immigrants now in the north as citizens, thus changing the population of the Ivory Coast in such a way as to ensure a permanent Muslim majority. Unlike the etiolated and wan post-Christian "Christians" of Europe, the black African Christians take their religion seriously, and furthermore, have a much better grasp of what Islam is all about, and what Muslim power means. America alone can protect the southern and western Sudanese -- 2 million victims is quite enough, and the U.N. is hopelessly in thrall to the Islamintern. So yes, let us think, as the poster above suggests, of Sudan -- and do something about it.

And get out of Iraq. And despite the likes of Tom Friedman, with his idiotic "we broke it, we fix it" vaporings, the country was a large concentration camp run by a monster. Nearly $200 billion has been spent to get rid of that regime, which had been in power for 35 years and could have remained another 35. Much money, too much, has already gone into building schools, rebuilding hospitals, protecting oil fields, etc. None of our affair. We did them a great favor. They are mostly -- save for a thin layer at the top of people who had spent 20, 30, 40 years in exile and managed to become, in part, Western rational men -- against us, and so what? We've disarmed the country. Time to go. If it holds together, fine. And if it doesn't, perhaps even better from the viewpoint of the Infidels.

But if you really wish the Iraqis well, then you must hope that they come to see how the failures, economic, political, social and intellectual, of their country are directly related to Islam itself. Chances are they won't. But they might. Some Turks did, at one point. Many Iranians have, after a quarter-century of the Islamic Republic of Iran. This does not make them permanent friends -- it does buy time, so that we, the Infidels, can more fully educate ourselves about this matter, and in Europe, reverse by all possible means, including those now not discussed, the growing islamization of the population. This is the minimum that is owed the past, and those who created Western civilization. If Giorgio Armani is insufficiently grateful to Piero and Leonardo and Michelangelo, then that is too bad for Giorgio Armani.

Posted by: Hugh at November 25, 2004 11:28 PM

Very, very few of the Indonesians in Holland are from muslim stock. Most were christian and are probably now atheist and there's virtually no problem whatsoever with people of Indonesian descent in Holland. Most of the Surinamese are also not muslim but christian or Hindu. The moroccans on the other hand... As for the various politicians who allowed the moroccans et al. to bring their wives and children to Europe, I'd like to know who they were so they can be confronted with what they've caused. As for the Ivory Coast, does anyone at all defend the Ivorians? Does everyone think its normal to force a country to naturalise millions of muslim immigrants against their will, who were only to glad to come to the Ivory Coast to get a job? Instead of being grateful these immigrants start an insurection and now control half the country with support of France. In defence of the French, many/most French don't like the muslim immigrants at all. I suggest you read some of Michel Houellebecq's novels, who is taken to court every so often by disgruntled muslims who accuse him of racism. I actually like France and the French and cannot understand why they have such a simply horrible political establishment that reflects badly on the French themselves. It's actually quite Kafkaesque.

Posted by: Arhopala at November 26, 2004 12:22 AM

Kilash,

The Muslim world has been demonizing us for more than 20 years. All of the talk of the "Great Satan" is not just rhetoric. All of the conspiracy theories that the U.S and the "Zionist entity Israel" are responsible for everything bad that happens in the Middle East are not just rhetoric.

As far as the suffering of the Iraqi babies - and the rest of the population - is concerned, you should place the blame where it belongs - on Saddam and his partners in crime. Follow the money. All of the billions in the Oil for Food program that Saddam ripped off - with the complicity of the UN and your wonderful French and Germans - would have bought food and medical supplies. The money would have bought, for instance, enough chlorine for both Saddam's numerous swimming pools AND the water purification plants. All of the resources he put into all of the palaces would have gone a long way to alleviate the suffering of the Iraqis.

Posted by: jay at November 26, 2004 1:57 AM

A pity the author of this "Eurabia" concept is Jewish, since that will be used to undermine and negate anything she says by the Muslims and the Muslim-apologist wing of the world press, turning it all into the familiar rant of "Zionist anti-Islamic propaganda".

From my point of view -as an agnostic with a classically Cynical bent (Diogenes meets Marcus Aurelius courtesy of Hypatia) and a Taoist with Buddhist leanings (Patanjali boating in the moonlight with Hui Neng as G.I. Gurdjieff plays zither)- I feel more capable of expressing the exact same view as the author without any possible retaliatory insults from the "acccused" about my religion, ethnicity or ties to the Illuminati, Israel or the C.I.A. I prefer to see humans as humble polyglots of evolutionary protoplasm, near-miraculous in their ability to think beyond food, sex and revenge. And will defend the freedom of thought, fought for against theocratic tyrants since the time of Socrates, with all of my might, ingenuity and intelligence.

What Islam has to offer is the same old doom for the opening humane mind and a tediously familiar consolation for the patriarchal megalomaniac in all men. And I do mean men. Women get the short end of the Musselman stick. (Why they don't smother about 60% of their despotic husbands, en masse, one Ramadan night I still haven't been able to figure, other than a centuries long brain-washing campaign has been extraordiarily effective. Maybe the internet will allow them to form a 'global pissed-off Muslim women's backlash network' against their bullying bastards? If they start collecting and embroidering heavy pillows, we'll know...)

Meanwhile, those who support freedom of thought need to encourage Islam to finally achieve its own Age of Reason, gain some much-needed religious humility, and an understanding of the frailty of the human mind- especially when it comes to Absolutist pronouncements about knowing the exact mind of the Creator.

If not, they will have to be opposed. HARD. Just as the Nazis and Communists* were- who had their own 'Ubermensch' vision and urge for world conquest that brought them nothing but a deadly clash with Reality, and final oblivion.

For a taste of what the voices for the Muslim leading edge are saying, check out:

http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.org/english/english.html

And read "Khalafah" as "Caliphate" (e.g. caliphs.)

What a joy it will be to submit to the world State of this mindset.

All women beaten silent.

All non-Muslims dead.

They sure know how to charm.

As Lenny Bruce once said: "Never trust a preacher with TWO suits."

And I would add: "Forget about the suits."

Happy Holidays. And read your Tom Paine.

(*Although the Chinese 'Communists'- in name only- are appearing to still 'exist', they are really an ancient form of adapted dynastic power which merely uses the recent trappings of the dead 'Party' system to loot the new wealth being raped from their sadly misused land, skimming a Mafia-like chunk of change off the global theft network going on in China -with the hijacking of intellectual property rights from around the world. As crooked as this is, the problem of fanatical Islam makes it negligible for the time being.)

Posted by: profitsbeard at November 26, 2004 2:41 AM

And for those who believe a two state solution is possible and the war on israel is not ISLAMIC JIHAD

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1101356023257&p=1078397702269

A survey of the Arab world organized by the Al-Arabia network website after the death of Yasser Arafat, showed 73.72% want a Hamas representative to replace Arafat, ITIM reported. In contrast only 0.7% expect that one of the PLO leaders will take over.

25.58% were in favor of an independent candidate.

113,107 participants from across the Arab world took part in the survey.

The organizers of the survey explained that the Hamas movement and the Islamic Jihad organization stand for the establishment of a Palestinian state on the land of historic Palestine, a concept that the PLO gave up on when the Oslo discussions began.

And arafat's stolen money being traced by CIA.
NOTE THE CANADIAN PHARMACEUTICAL CONNECTIONS!

http://www.israpundit.com/archives/2004/11/cia_finds_arafa.php#more

THE late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat controlled a network of companies, investments and bank accounts with a value totalling at least $1.9 billion, according to the Austrian business magazine Format.

Quoting a Central Intelligence Agency report, it said yesterday the CIA had conducted inquiries after receiving information that a holding company of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation had invested $11.6 million in a small pharmaceutical company in the Canadian town of Belleville, Ontario.

Format said investigators had "stepped on an anthill" when they uncovered the stake held by the Palestinian Commercial Service Corporation in Bioniche Life Sciences

Posted by: george at November 26, 2004 3:53 AM

I think Bat Yeo'r has it correct. This interview is really quite good and the transcript should be downloaded and added to your resources. Actually listening to the interview using the Real Player option on the page is highly recommended.

Ms. Ye’or is not a ranting hysterical woman with an attitude. She is very measured and thoughtful on her responses, her voice revealing a certainty of purpose and integrity as well as honesty and sincerity. She is not and has said so, putting all Muslim people in the Islamist category, but calling for a change in their way of conducting their relations with non-Muslims to eliminate the practice of dhimmitude and resulting laws which create an imbalance which leads to further and further subjugation to Islam of those under its weight.

Ms. Yeo'r's observations of the genesis and current state of affairs in the Islamic protectorate of Eurabia should serve as a warning to the Europeans that the window of opportunity is rapidly closing to reverse course back to their Christian heritage and sovereignty, or they will be an Islamic entity complete with functioning Shiriá by the end of this century at the latest.

Posted by: Andrew at November 26, 2004 4:16 AM

Thank you jay for your comments to Kilash's misconceptions about who the real person responsible for much of the horror that was in Saddam's Iraq. I read a wonderful article about the "Oil For Food" scandal that laid out this problem in great detail. The author firmly laid down the responsible parties for the said horrors that Iraqi's faced under Saddam's regime. And, the UN were complicit in his abuse of his own people. Here's the link, should anyone be interested in this matter: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/SpecialArticle_print.asp?article=A11705017_1 .

Sorry that I can't link it directly into the comments, but I don't know how to do the basic features in these comments threads. I don't even know how to use the bold or italics. If anyone would care to give me help with this I would appreciate it. :-)

Oh, and kilash, if you want better news than you get from Al-Jazeerah, which is basically propaganda, you may wish to try looking around the internet for blogs that are reliable. Otherwise, you will show yourself to be misinformed at every level and no one here will take you seriously. Just a suggestion.

Posted by: paula at November 26, 2004 4:38 AM

Oh, that's nice, the site did it for me. :-D ...

Oh, and just one other comment. If you read that article completely, you will find that the UN at every turn tried to continually EXPAND the Oil for Food program, while the US and the UK were trying to continually get the UN to make an accounting of the program - which of course they refused to do. This, you need to take into consideration Kilash. The US and UK were not the bad guys after all. It is kind of hard, you see, to get the Secretary General to do any hard examination of a program that his son-in-law was a party of - at least, that seems to be the motivation for Kofi Annan's attempt to sweep this whole thing under the rug. ;-)

Posted by: paula at November 26, 2004 4:43 AM

Koffi annan is a crook who would sold his mother to Saddam for a couple of dollars.

Posted by: Seculartalk at November 26, 2004 11:03 AM

paula:

Contact me via SusanB's network at susan_b356@yahoo.com and I'll tell you how to do it.

CGW

Posted by: CGW at November 26, 2004 11:30 AM

To all:

God is to morals what gold is to the economy. The spiritual malaise that started to develop in the Western World since the time (1879?) Christian values gave way to our relativistic and highly speculative secular democracies and its principles, eventually resulted in the expulsion of God from our lives to all practical communal purposes. It is my view that there is a financial equivalence in the worldwide dropping of the gold standard.

Remember how it happened?:

During WWI, Britain spent so much money trying to kill Germans (and viceversa), she bankrupted herself. So heavily in debt was the country (mostly to U.S. creditors), the Brits had to go off the gold standard - effectively ending a financial system that had served the world well for 100 years.

Half a century later, Americans found themselves in a similar quandary. This time it was the Vietnam War and Lyndon Johnsosn’s Great Society that had done the damage. America could no longer afford to honour its promises. So Richard Nixon "closed the gold window" at the U.S. Treasury and ended another financial system, namely the Bretton Woods one.
Since then, the world has operated on a Dollar System. Central banks hold dollars in their vaults and count on the U.S. Fed to keep its currency from going bad. But now the dollar is going bad and the bankers don't know what to do. For the moment, they are frozen between two awful choices. They can continue lending; or they can stop.

Though it is not central to the purpose of my discourse, let me dwell on it:

Central bankers have trillions of dollars in their vaults. And their economies depend upon the U.S. consumer. In order to spend, the U.S. consumer must have access to easy credit - for he has no savings and his income barely increases. In order to keep the U.S. consumer consuming, central bankers must lend him money. Indeed, a study by the New York Fed showed that it takes more than the entire world's savings to keep Americans living in the style to which they've become accustomed. Private investors have already withdrawn much of their support for the dollar and the U.S. consumer. If central bankers pull out too - the jig is up. The entire world economy will have to face the consequences of a collapse in consumer demand, a collapsing dollar...and the end of the Dollar System.

But if they continue to lend they will have to add billions more - maybe trillions more - dollars to his vault. What will they do with them? Why would they want to increase their exposure to an asset this is already losing value...one that everyone knows is not solid...and one that everyone expects to fall at least another 20%? they would have to be mad to buy more dollars. And mad not to.
Japan alone has $820 billion of foreign currency reserves. A 20% drop in the dollar's value would reduce the value of this asset by $164 billion. What banker will want to be the one to report that loss to his shareholders? In Japan, they are likely to hand him a hara-kiri knife...and stay for the show.
For the moment, dollar holders don't seem to believe their own eyes. They have been told the dollar is falling. They have seen it fall. They have every reason to believe it will fall more. They feel trapped, stunned…and desperate.

Does it sound familiar to anyone worrying about the state of affairs in our modern, so-called civilized world when contemplated from the moral standpoint?

We all who visit regularly this JW site and feel ourselves at home in it, indeed are very much concerned about the developing of the Islamist menace in our societies. However, somehow forgetting that before addressing this ominous problem we have to solve some other important aspects of our respective communal lives, we waste time and efforts to expose, discredit and combat the nonetheless horrendous Muslim ideology. I say so because, in my opinion, the latter belongs to a second phase of the struggle, our own full fletched jihad, indeed the easiest one, should we successfully conclude the previous one(s).

Which ones are those? you might ask. Putting our own house in order is first and paramount. Getting rid (do not ask me how) of the decadent, misguided individuals in our midst is an important second must. Who are they? To start with (but not exhausting the list), all who act as a collaborators of the Islamist enemies. I insist on that fighting the ideological war to introduce the Christian equivalent to the economic “gold standard” is top priority. In my humble opinion, the Muslim element happens to be some sort of passer-byer who in view of the sorry state of our moral world decided to take advantage by challenging the walking dead they perceive in us all. After the first pushing around, they realized how weak we actually are despite our mighty technological appearance and were encouraged by it. Mind you, these guys are natural depredators because their primitiveness is being propelled by a belief-system that teaches them to be so promising them the war booty in this world and 72 fresh asses in the other. Le me add how very ominous it all sounds that they have set their eyes on us, for they seldom get it wrong when their greed radar comes into play.

Finally, can any of you blame the lion for behaving as such when stalking, attacking and finally devouring an innocent, gracious gazelle? That is why I myself cannot feel any hate for Muslims but anger and frustration to belong to the decadent society I see around me, making me feel like prey, a very humiliating, sobering thought I must say it is. According to my theory, the Islamic factor simply is the obscure force Mother Nature uses to set matters straight. That’s the reason I turn to people like you and me to fight the scourge, so as to, at the end of the day, been capable of saying to Nature that we Westerners still are a viable species.

This -instead chasing Muslims physically or chastising them verbally or otherwise- is the daunting task we all have to face if we ever are to overcome the present test History, Nature… and Charles Darwin seem to have pitched us against.

Posted by: Cid Campeador at November 26, 2004 12:33 PM

Jay:

The Muslim world has been demonizing all non-Muslims pretty much since its inception, pronouncing all Kufrs "unclean".

Kilash: One of Saddam Husein's great hero/models was Joe Stalin, who systematically starved millions of Ukranians into submission in the 1930s.

Doubtless, this is exactly what he had in mind as he syphoned billions in income from the oil-for-food voucher scam, which allowed him not only to finance Osama's merger with other smaller Islamist terrorist organizations, but to keep idle scientists on the payroll so that when the UN inspectors, et al were out of the way, he could restart his various bio and chem warfare programs.

Pretty clever of him, eh? Make your internal enemies suffer, make your external enemies the villans of the piece, garner support from all the gullibles in the "anti-war movement" and rebuild your war chest in one fell swoop.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at November 26, 2004 1:03 PM

Admiral don Juan (The third by any chance?).
You say:
"I think that Western nations should get out of all Muslim countries, cut off all aid to Muslim countries, cut off all economic and social contacts with Muslim countries, ban all Muslim immigration, deport as many Muslims as possible, throw the rest in concentration camps and then build barriers as per Israel and let you Muslims stew in your own juice."

Nor that I disagree at all with all these wishful-thinking proposals of yours but I wonder how do you think they can be implemented while governments of the likes of the ones presided by Chirac, Zapatero or calling the immigration shots like Tony Blair's David Blunkets (just to list the most conspicuous masters of European dhimmitude)remain in power and enjoy the acceptance of the majority of the voting population as they at present do. You must realize the necessity to do something in the political domestic scene/front before engaging ourselves in any sort of drastic policies aimed at getting rid of our national islamic pests.

Posted by: Cid Campeador at November 26, 2004 1:15 PM

Kilash said:

"No dialogue... ever? Then what? A bitter unwinnable war with about a billion believers? The more we demonize a group of people, the more likely we can justify atrocities against them."

Folks,

1) No meaningful dialogue is possible in face of taqiyya, kitman, etc.

2) The inevitable war, already underway, is decidedly winnable, once our policy-makers get real.

3) It matters not that there are a billion "believers." Even if all these "believers" were willing and knowledgeable followers of Islam, it would not matter--we will still win. It does make it easier, however, that so many of (however many of them there actually are) are not "True Believers" and could, in time and with the promise of protection from death-dealing mullahs, abandon their irrational and invalid philosophy.

4) Throughout its history, Islam has had a policy of justifying the crudest and cruelest of atrocities. We have not "demonized" Islam; it has accomplished that feat all on its own. Nothing we do can compare to what has been the official, morally authorized exercise of terror,in time of both war and peace, visited upon Infidels and Muslims alike, by Islam. Inasmuch as any defensive action taken against Islam is regarded as "atrocious" by them, and unjustified, we must simply ignore their accusations and proceed as necessary to assure our continued existence.

Posted by: cubed at November 26, 2004 2:08 PM

BTW, I know there are a lot of us out there who see a certain sympathy between American Liberals, socialists around the world, and Islam, and wonder why this is so.

It's because of Immanual Kant, the German philosopher who was only the third in history who developed a COMPLETE system of philosophy, including all five major branches: 1) ethics, 2) epistemology, 3) metaphysics, 4) esthetics, and 5) politics.

Kant died in 1804, and refined the concept of nihilism, which was the central theme of his philosophy. The Encarta dictionary defines "nihilism" this way: 1) total rejection of social mores (the general rejection of established social conventions and beliefs); 2) the belief that nothing is worthwhile (a belief that life is pointless and that human values are worthless); 3) disbelief in objective truth (the belief tht there is no objective basis for truth); and 4) belief in destruction of authority (the belief that all established authority is corrupt and must be destroyed).

Kant was responsible for the spread of nihilism around the world, and his followers included Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler. The Weimar period in Germany was the first to demonstrate clearly what nihilism meant.

It got into this country because of our two wars with Britain. Around the time of the Civil War, America sent her sons to Europe, especially Germany, to finish their educations. Because of the recent wars, emotions were still raw, and Britain was (unfortunately) not our first choice. Nihilism had come to Britain, but was not nearly as intense as in Germany.

When young American men returned to the U.S., they entered all fields, including journalism (THAT explains a lot, doesn't it?), politics (no surprise here), and. . .EDUCATION.

Nihilism wormed its way into Teachers' Colleges and then to teachers and then to our children. Our children grew up and eventually gave birth to the hedonistic nihilists of the 60s.

That's why today we see school massacres, children engaged in trivial sex, riots at sporting events, people who have to drug themselves up so they don't have to be aware of what is--or isn't--going on inside their own heads, music that is uncomfortable noise, art that is incomprehensible, movies and games filled with gratuitous violence, and policians who seem bound and determined to bring down the free world.

Many of us recognize that something is terribly wrong, but we have been deprived of philosophy for so many school generations that we don't have a clue about why our country and the world is so polarized, so morally uncertain, and so confused about what to do.

Many of us look to our faiths to sustain us, but faith was never intended to arm us against the war we face today; Islam, on the other hand, is a complete philosophy of nihilism, just as Kant's was, and at root comes from the same source--Plato.

Philosophy was once taught as a separate discipline, much like mathematics or literature. Most schools of philosophy are incomprehensible, because they, like Kant's, are invalid. If you fail to find them attractive, it is a tribute to your basic decency and your intact intellect.

Our only ammunition against nihilism is an objective, complete, comprehensible philosophy.

Posted by: cubed at November 26, 2004 3:38 PM

Cube:

I have founf very interesting your explanation on how we Westerners hava arrived to our present-day moral morass -nihilism by other name. However, in my opinion Emmmanuel Kant himself was a victim of the same virus infecting our communities now. See how I explain it in a post of mine last week nobody seemed to have paid much attention to:

When many years ago I started worrying about what I perceived as a decadent vein in my own country (Cube, you can call it nihilism), I tried to find an explanation and a possible prognosis in books such as Oswald Spengler’s 'Der Untergang des Abendlande' and Arnold Toynbee’s 'A Study of History'.

The English professor concluded that though it was more or less apparent to him that the western world had indeed entered its final phase of decline –in fact concurring with the German historian that it all started upon the French Revolution- he couldn´t see in the horizon a credible opponent capable of challenging our overwhelming worldwide lead.

Realizing myself that he was right in this assumption, I kept wondering how long could it last a society like the one I saw falling into an ever deeper hole, even in the absence of a challenger. After all, the biblical Sodom and Gomorrah crashed from within, by the sheer weight of their own depravations although someone tried to explain it afterwards in a fanciful manner, mystical overtones and a prophetic bias (although not a religious person, I pay tribute to those in the Ten Commandments that are not faith- related, practically the six last ones in the Catholic version of it).

Later on I used to muse on how the gigantic scientific impetus of our civilization was acting as an effective smokescreen that prevented us from seeing the moral pigmies behind it, so along the 80’s and first part of the 90’s I believed we would end up poisoning ourselves to death (and the rest of the world as well) through pollution, in the course of the present century or so, for I always dismissed the plausibility of a final, fatal nuclear clash between the two superpowers of the moment.

Then the first Afghan war and the recurrent Palestine conflict brought into focus to me the Islam factor, very mildly at first but in increasingly sharper lines with the passing of time, until I finally recognized in it the entity Arnold Toynbee found missing. Altough, differently from O. Spengler, his philosophical analysis of History is not deterministic at all, I myself feel closer to the latter in that there exists a compelling something that dictates the fate of human societies, as if the men and women in them couldn´t help passing unto their own creations the mortal condition of their individual beings. Otherwise -without the help of hidden, subtle historical or even biological forces- it would be incomprehensible that a bunch of automated morons capable of happily die for am obviously misguided, barbaric belief could end up forcing someone like me to write these lines.

The contemplation and further analysis of the related events in the past three or four decades is all I need to realize how come something I could not first imagine has finally happened.
It was first the famous Enoch Powell 1968 “Rivers of Blood” speech that cost him his political career after being trounced by the press and discredited from within his own Party. When in that distant past I heard of it, I immediately positioned myself on his side, despite the fact it was none of my business at all, just a vague sentiment of solidarity with truth and reason. Perhaps almost nobody remembers him now in England –very possibly the most ‘dhimmitude-prone’ society in the world- a lovely country indeed that it was when I first visited it in the early sixties but one I felt sorry for when I spent in London and Birminghan a couple of weeks some four years ago. Indeed, like in old beautiful England, we, their Continental cousins, are hosting an inordinate number of muslims (15 million, some reckon) who find it terribly difficult to integrate and, as a surprising consequence, hold us responsible for their lousy choice when they themselves or someone in their families decided to knock like beggars at our door. But alas, this spoil-brat mentality is all too prevalent in the muslim masses.

It afterwards was the realization that the poor birth rate in our societies made it mandatory to resort to these peoples in order to keep ourselves functioning in some sort of orderly manner, the harbinger of future terrible disorders and a mere postponement of the inevitable collapse it all was.

To make a long story short, it finally came Osama bin Laden and his atrocious 11-M attack, just in case somebody didn´t know what the muslim agenda was. In my opinion he did us a favour, otherwise the muhammadian daughter’s bellies would have achieved in three decades what the terrorist’s bombs aim at doing in thirty years, the difference been that we somehow can defend ourselves against the latter but nobody knows how to do likewise about the former.

We are not just contemplating a scenario of physical forces at play, for there is a moral side in this drama, for instance the abortion laws and the fast disappearance of the nuclear family, an institution where the transmission of moral values occur. There is a saying attributed to Sophocles, I believe, the great Greek dramatist who also was a priest and a general: “When the Gods seek the perdition of a man, they turn him mad first”. To make full sense of it in the context of my reasoning, the sentence should repalace ‘men’ for ‘societies’ and mad’ for ‘imbecile’, for what we are contemplating in the Western picture is not a matter of total loss of the capacity to reason but a lamentable lack of understanding of the causal laws -what is happening and why -. It is precisely that what makes a society senile, the previous step to extinction. Only through the incapacity to comprehend what is at stake can one explain that at the present juncture we are witnessing important and supposedly clever people in our midst keen on admitting seventy million half-baked Turkish 'democrats' inside our frontiers, on top of the aforementioned 15 million muslims already here, which we seem unable to digest. Enoch Powell revisited.

Haven’t we learnt anything yet? In any case, time is running out… unless it is true what Bat Ye’or denounces in her Eurabian book, in which case everything is going well, according to plan.
Only through the ‘imbecile’ explanation can a neutral soul understand the moronic immigration regulations or lack of them; the vastly inappropriate laws erected to defend ourselves against the terrorist onslaught; our own internal divisions in the face of an imminent, fatal danger; the delusion of the vast majority of our European leaders and opinion makers when thinking there’s such a thing as a moderate, assimilable Islam; the Euro-American rift; the abandonment of our ancestral morals precisely when they are most needed to fight back in the spiritual realm, which doesn’t necessarily imply a war of-or-for religion, although resorting exclusively to the defence of the so-call democratic values and principles is in my opinion grossly insufficient simply because the relativistic rock that our democracies offer to anchor one’s beliefs onto is made of a substance softer than talc.

The list of inadequacies and malfunctions is long and very depressing. Little wonder we are facing the quandary resulting form the evaluation of our intrinsic weakness Osma ben Laden made when daringly delivered his first blow. How come that a bunch of fanatics managed to successfully deliver the terrible Twin Towers/Pentagon punch with little financial expense, totally unhindered and with the extra bonus of later provoking the very serious division within the NATO allies we all are witnessing? Mind you, righteous Europe indeed is the side who stands to lose more should the present rift develop into something more serious, a very likely possibility now that G.W. Bush has nailed a second term, to the surprise of his declared enemies in general and of Osama ben Laden in particular, something that sounds ominous to me because, as said before, the Islamic terrorists have finally realized who is the weaker link in the already frayed Alliance. Once those Islamic bastards succeed at alienating for good our American allies, the time will be ripe for them to launch their final attack on the European bastion, which is no bastion at all without once again the help of the American arms, just a house of cards hastily arranged we all are.

This being my second post at the Dhimmi Watch blog, I feel like introducing myself, if only to give geographic perspective to my post. I am writing this from Spain and, just in case anyone hasn’t noticed, I belong to the scant 7% minority of Spaniards (according to a very recent poll) who decried the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq when our Socialist party won the general elections three days after the Madrid 11-M train bombings. Thanks to the investigations carried on by the reporters of the only truly nation-wide independent newspaper we have (‘El Mundo’), we are little by little discovering that the terrible massacre that took the lives of almost 200 people and injured two thousand, was in fact a political plot aimed at precisely achieving what finally was the most conspicuous product of it: the overthrow of the conservative government poised to be the undisputed winner before the commuting trains’ mass killings took place. It is becoming a clear and clearer picture now that the small-time delinquent Moroccans who actually planted the bombs (most of whom ended up blowing their guts away when cornered by our police), were the cheap, expendable labour used by the real plotters, a possible combination of the Moroccan secret services, our own ETA separatists and even someone from the political opposition, the French own secret services not to be excluded, all four groups declared enemies of Mr.Aznar, our ex-president. By the way, he was received by Mr. Bush upon the latter’s electoral victory, to the chagrin of Mr. Zapatero, the reprehensible socialist coward who played it in the hands of Osama ben Laden when accepting his conditions for peace. The fact that as of today he has not been seen by the White House is a good example of the rift I was referring to before. By the way, I only hope Mr. Bush keeps teaching him the lesson that between an elephant and an ant, only the first can become annoyed by the latter, never the other way around.

In successive posts I meshall be keeping the visitors of this blog informed of the latest developments of this recent Spanish tragedy whose investigation is yet been carried by journalists, in the face of the incredible passivity of the Spanish police who, more incredibly yet, knew about the plans of the so-called islamists from its inception, insofar as some of them were “soplones”, their confidents. To make matters worse, the explosives used in the massacre were provided by Spanish nationals who in turn were fully controlled by our police, both the uniformed and the plain clothes variety ...

Not to make this dissertation interminable, I shall finally clarify my intention in including this sad domestic episode just to exemplify the kind of debilitating inadequacies we Westerners have to face and solve before marching headlong against our Islamic scourge. If we do not concentrate in putting first our own house in order we will simply fail in our efforts to combat terrorism, any kind of it, for they all fester on delusion and division, brought upon by sheer terror and, in some instances, the help of sinister connivances. Delusion and division indeed are home-grown bitter fruits, the result of the devastating (‘imbecile’) understanding of what democracy is all about, something I have been referring to all along this post.

In fact, should the current events follow its own uncorrected course along the lines portrayed here, I reckon the first victim will be our democratic system itself. Life comes before any facilitating device, comes it not?

Posted by: Cid Campeador at November 26, 2004 4:06 PM

You say that in France it’s no longer acceptable to criticise Islam or the Arab countries, but I want to put it to you that that’s changing. We’ve seen in recent times, the novelist Michel Houellebecq acquitted in the court case around his comments about Islam being a stupid religion. We’ve seen the news laws introduced about preventing French Muslim schoolgirls wearing the hijab. Isn’t the French government symbolically drawing a line in the sand now? In other words, aren’t policies starting to change? - Stephen Crittenden

It accepts the criticism, but to call (and this is the attitude of Edward Said and of the dhimmi) to accept to never criticise dhimmitude because in fact it is forbidden for a dhimmi to criticise the Muslim law. It if criticised the Muslim law, he can be killed. So the West is obeying this law of Sharia without even knowing it. - Bat Yeor.

Nah, you see, it's not, Bat. We don't have sharia'h, it is possible to criticise and live (though of course it scares me that there are individual thugs who don't accept this), and you just ignored the point being made.

Axe grind much?

Posted by: johnnydee at November 26, 2004 7:49 PM

Hey Cid! Welcome, yes I understood where you were from. I too know Spanish. In fact there is a forum just waiting for you to come and spice it up. http://spanish.faithfreedom.org/forum

I am the moderator there. I started a thread just for the 11-M incident, but nobody said "boo". Perhaps if you come, we can get started.

Bienvenidos a ambos DhimmiWatch y FFI. Espero que diviertas mucho durante sus investigaciones. Es un placer.

Posted by: Ibn Rushd at November 26, 2004 11:51 PM

I think Kilash is trying to wave an olive branch.

My question for Muslims who desire peace (and I believe there are those who are sincere about it) is, how do you go about living in peace with us kaffirin--especially in places like southern Spain, Portugal, Israel, or northern India, which were once Muslim-ruled, and at times may have had Muslim near-majorities or majorities; but are now mostly something else?

Also, please consider, that when the Muslim theologians tell us that the Jews and Christians corrupted the Scriptures they cannot explain why these two non-cooperating religions read the same Old Testament, or why the various competing Christian sects read the same New Testament (even when they do not cooperate). Hence, do we not here have a reason to stick to our faith?

Or, when the Qu'ran seems to teach that we Christians believe in a trinity of the Father, the Son, and Mary (instead of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit); that Jews regard Ezra (Uzair) as the son of God the way Christians do Jesus, are we not justified in believing the Qu'ran mistaken?

Do we not deserve a better argument and presentation of Islam than death threats against anyone who raises a doubt about Islam, Muhammad, and the Qu'ran?

BTW, the more I read about Theo van Gogh, the more I am certain I would not have liked the guy had I known him personally. Still, this does not make a capital crime.

Posted by: Kepha1 at November 27, 2004 3:25 AM

Cid Compreador: Bienvenido. Muchos gracias por your post. There. I've exhausted my Spanish.

Bat Ye'or is absolutely right that the thing that makes the West great is its biblical taproot. Even our limited government tradition (rule of law, consent of the governed) goes back to the reading of Deateronomy 17, I Sam 8, and a number of places in the Old and New Testaments that exhibit an ambiguous feeling about power--to say nothing that there is only one Anointed of the Lord, Jesus Christ (Christos = anointed); not some king, dynasty, or line of "rightly-guided" caliphs.

Some force moving history? Nonsense. We are seeing the just judgments of God against those who have decided to deny him. Leave the force to Star Wars. Even the father of the Western rationalist tradition, Socrates, when confronted with Callicles' assertion that the tyrant is the happiest of men (Gorgias) realized that all ethics is meaningless without a judgment that faces us after death.

Perhaps Europe is too weak and cowardly to reproduce itself precisely because it will not confess Christ. It thinks it "knows" that the end is physical death, and no more; hence it will give itself to Epicurean delight, and figure nothing will matter after the individual dies.

Posted by: Kepha1 at November 27, 2004 3:45 AM

I left a post for you somewhere else. I repeat it here so as to increase the chances for you to come across it. Also, this one here has been corrected to eliminate a few spelling mistakes. Read it with friendly eyes, for despite my contestation to some of you views, I am on your side to all practical purposes.

I said in my first post:

Being myself an agnostic that rejected his Catholic upbringing at an early stage of his reasoning maturity (though I do not brag about it and stick to the Ten Commandments spirit) I think whatever I have to say in relation to the spiritual vacuum you Kepha call nihilism will complement your own views on this matter.

Mine are that the reason why people in our midst (like this disoriented woman in Hugh's story) are easy prey for the Mohammadians, lies in something one modern scientist-philosopher defined this way: "Nature abhors vacuum". It also means that Nature tends to fill it up, doesn´t matter what with. But you do not need to believe in something supernatural or metaphysical to be 'full'. Even a confirmed atheist can be a full, decent, coherent and articulate human being if he simply adheres to the principle: "Don't do to others..." which in fact is what makes the difference between a good and an evil belief-system and what moves me to adhere to the Catholic praxis after all.

If only we all could understand and apply this criteria we wouldn't be contemplating the catastrophic mistake been made by the moronic Doris Gluek of the moment. Been such a simple thing, the fact is that many people in our Western societies seem unable to discover the truth in it, a sad reflection of the general disorientation generated by whatever our Western values' system has evolved to be at present.

The crude reality is that from our civilized righteous emptiness we are facing a hideous, barbaric but powerful ideology who will eventually devour us, for Nature doesn´t discern between the goodies and the baddies when it comes to allocate success, but between the daring and the meek, the givers and the takers, the strong and the weak.

The way I see it, the 'admirable' Christian precept to offer one´s other cheek when slapped in the face is an abomination because it makes of us easy prey and helps perpetuate the dominance of the unscrupulous. You see, Kepha, after avoiding at all costs to be empty, it is mandatory to be filled with the right stuff, the one Mother Nature favours, for it is Her the one who calls the shots when the time of reckoning arrives to decide who of the two or several contestants is going to survive.

So, Kepha, please keep passing the ammunition while you pray, will you?

Posted by: Cid Campeador at November 27, 2004 6:23 AM

Cid Campeador, thank you for your excellent post. I am also a new member here writing from Paris, and I think this forum is great a great place to share perspectives from different countries. Your thoughts match those of many here. Defeating the Islamic monster is as much, if not more far a battle in the minds of whether we believe our civilization is worth fighting for not.

I too find it completely incomprehensible that we have allowed this situation of abject surrender in the face of a clear and present danger. There is a quote somewhere out there, where a Frenchman is accusing an unfortunate American for the usual sins, the worst of course being McDonalds. The American replies "One French philosopher does more damage to the USA than any number of burger bars or movies can ever do to the French"

Your search for the root cause of our dhimmitude which leads directly to the French Revolution is well argued and re reading your post, I feel that you are very close to the truth. I am half French, but educated in the UK, where it seems that our history education was far more complete than that my French cousins. (I was at school in the 80s, so maybe it has changed since then) I often argue that the French Revolution brought precisely nothing to France and the counter argument I hear is simply a long list of anti-British (to be more precise, anti-English) comments, ranging from Fashoda, Crecy, Dakar, Rosetta Stone, the Gentleman's Agreement, Mers-el-Kebir and of course our terrible food. None of these have much to do with the French Revolution, and the life of a French peasant was decididly worse after 1789.

The taught history in France also seems to have have gone through a savage Gaullist revisionist meat grinder, and more recently a PC (Politically Correct, not Parti Communiste, but who can really tell the difference) rehash where today, those teachers, who are able to escape the confines of la pensee unique, are sacked for teaching that Mohammed was a thief (Google 'Louis Chagnon' for more info on this).

If ever you are in Paris and would like to see this revision in full force then, please visit the Musee du Marechal Lerclerc at the Gare Montparnasse, where you will learn how the Free French Forces defeated the Nazi foe despite the best efforts of the Anglo Saxon to try and take command of the whole operation. I exagerate, but only a little.

This may seem a little off topic, but if one has no grasp of causes and effects of events of history, especially that of the 20th century, it is impossible to understand the danger our civilization is facing today. This is doubly important in an age where religion has no real baring on anyones lives.

A book came out last year called Historiquement Correct by Jean Sevillia, which attacks all recent historical revisions. Common belief now is that the Crusades were wrong, Spain was glorious under the Muslims, Catholicism is evil because of the inquisition, Pope Pius XII was a Nazi, and Slavery was all our fault. The writer turns all these arguements around and shows how badly kids aquire history. If the crux of your historical ideology is rooted in hatred of your culture, and you have no religion, how on earth can you hope to defeat Islam. There is nothing you can possibly find attractive in your civilization.

The solution I feel, lies in the pages of Jihad Watch and elsewhere. We not only need to gently convert others to Islamophobia, we also need to teach or fellow man and woman to love our civilization again. We need to talk to people. Not all the French are Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys. George Bush did have 17 % of support here in the US elections. Considering the massive anti-Bush media, this 17 % is nothing short of miraculous. We have the power of calm rational argument on our side, backed up with plenty of evidence. I am sure plenty of people here have already guided friends and family to re examine their world view. Many of us, me included, have evolved from multicultural relativists to fully fledged Islamophobes in a few short years and understand the mindset we are up against. Leftists, the sensible ones at any rate, are not our enemy, they simply haven't taken the trouble to think through their ideology to its logical outcome. Every jihad bomb, makes our arguments more potent. We are now in a golden age of Internet Blogging. We can unspin everything we are told. A few more Theo's, and maybe a Mel Gibson movie on the life of Mohammed and we have a chance of getting out of this, over the heads of our pointless powerless passive politicians.

Posted by: LeftBank at November 27, 2004 7:58 AM

LeftBank:

I myself started posting in this blog (or any other for that matter) only last week and also like you find comfort in meeting like-minded people here who inspire me and give me a glimmer of hope on what a foresee is a gloomy outcome for us Westerners who, as you say, seem to hate themselves but on the other hand -I am sure- loathe being threatened by a bunch of fanatical morons who cannot be given the benefit of the doubt insofar as they know by heart the despicable book they call ‘holy’.

Anyway, in one of my first posts I said something about the French (and their Revolution) that might have attracted your attention. Let me hiss this in your ear: I have recently inherited my mother’s house, a 250 y.o. building that has amassed inside the accumulations of ten generations of hoarders, a family trait it seems to be. One of my favourite pieces is a sorry, polychrome, solid wood sculpture of a beautiful life-size Arch-angel Saint Michael. I say sorry because missing in it are the proverbial solid-gold scale pans, the flaming sword (espada flamígera) and one of his legs.

My mother told me the story: Upon the momentary defeat of the French Army (general Dupont, the looter of Córdoba) in Bailén in the summer of 1908 by the troops of our general Castaños, the very Emperor came to Spain with a refreshment of 250.000 troops to reinstate his brother Joseph the First (‘Pepe Botella’ was he nicknamed by the Spaniards, despite the fact that he was moderate in his drinking habits, thus adding pepper to the insult). Alongside many decisive historical events, a decisive battle took place near where I live, which we lost. So as the story goes, the French troops made their way into my house and looted it thoroughly, my poor, now-derelict, wooded Saint Michael being deprived of all the elements on him having a gold-leaf layer (‘pan de oro’). So there we have the enlightening picture: the noble French revolutionaries who came to Spain to teach us good manners and the spirit of human rights thing, behaving like the brute depredators they frequently were ..and are.

There is one point however that I would like to delve on. You say: “If the crux of your historical ideology is rooted in hatred of your culture, and you have no religion, how on earth can you hope to defeat Islam. There is nothing you can possibly find attractive in your civilization…”

While I cannot entirely disagree with it, I really believe there must be a way out from our moral morass (or perhaps it is only confusion) without resorting to religion. I for one am a catholic turned agnostic who thinks even an atheist can be a totally decent, articulate and lovable person as far as he respects the very Christian precept: “Do not do unto others…”. That should suffice to qualify as a good person and to make the crucial distinction between good and evil belief-systems. After that, it only takes appealing to the love of flag and country (which in our case means liberty and common sense) to reject any ideology that contradicts and endangers our values, our way of life. I agree we acquired these values through our ancestral Christian faith but we at present can do fairly well with the distillation of it into our secular, layman’s souls, for what has the dogma of the Holly Trinity to do with morals, decency or personal integrity?, may I ask.

That said, I despise those who on the one hand call themselves devout Christians and on the other are prepared to say ‘yes’ to a EU Constitution drafted by obscure forces that deny in its lines the presence of the word “Christianity”. What the hell do they think Europe would be without it? You do not need to be a believer to detect a filthy rat in this fresh conspiracy inspired by the forces of evil, do you? That is why I keep insisting: before sending the cavalry head on against the Moslem trenches, we first must address the problem posed by our own PC, tree-huggers nihilists.

If you keep dwelling in this blog, there will be plenty of occasions for us to fine-tune our theories, so WELCOME… and keep coming.

Posted by: Cid Campeador at November 27, 2004 3:37 PM

Well, I for one want to say welcome to both of you - Leftbank and Cid Campeador. I think, despite religious or idealogical differences, that it is important that we from the West both keep and maintain our civilization from the barbarous hordes. That is why I am always heartened to see posters from the other side of the pond that are aware of the threat that we all face with Islam on its next attempted worldwide Jihad. Thank you for your postings.

Posted by: paula at November 27, 2004 11:51 PM