re: "Punching Down"

Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna (" At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war. ") provided examples of why free speech rights shouldn't be optional for governments to respect.

Money quote(s):

"Fear is in the air.

Fear of what Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff had to say about Islam prompted the Austrian authorities to prosecute her for “denigrating” the Religion of Peace."

There are crucial differences between the free speech rights of the Anglospheric tradition, enshrined in our Second Amendment, and those permitted under continental European constitutions. Shouting "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater is permitted, for instance, when the movie theater is actually on fire.

"Fearing the truths told by Geert Wilders, the Dutch government prosecuted the PVV leader, and when that failed, prosecuted him again.

In Switzerland, Sweden, Finland, Canada, Denmark, France, Italy, Australia, and Belgium, ordinary citizens and politicians alike have been harassed or prosecuted for speaking out against Islamization and mass immigration."

Some opinions are clearly too dangerous for citizens or even lawmakers to possess or express. Perhaps expressing the desire for Holland to remain a country inhabited by the Dutch is example of this.

"(W)hen the decent law-abiding people are thrust aside, driven into obscurity, and jailed, what sort of activists will remain?

The current system is nearing its endgame, and will not persist much longer. Who will take the reins of power when the dominant paradigm falls?"

Both Ralph Peters and Tom Kratman have explored this "what-if" and neither path is pretty.

"(B)y denying decent, honorable, law-abiding people the right to preserve themselves, their families, and their way of life — the Powers That Be have cleared the deck for the emergence of forces that are much darker, much more ruthless, and far beyond their ability to control.

Something wicked this way comes."

1/4

re: "A Rational Actor in Pursuit of Wholly Irrational Goals"

Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna (" At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war. ") isn't falling for the mirror-imaging fallacy.

Money quote(s):

"The Islamic Republic of Iran is on the verge of building an operational nuclear warhead. It already possesses ballistic missiles capable of delivering it.

Those who understand the eschatological doctrines of Shi’a Islam know that a nuclear-capable Iran will not be deterred, as the Soviet Union was deterred during the Cold War, by the prospect of Mutually Assured Destruction. According to Shi’ite theology it is the duty of faithful Muslims to bring on the End Times and expedite the appearance of the Twelfth Imam. One of the recommended ways of hastening the Shi’ite apocalypse is to cause widespread destruction in the world by whatever means come to hand.

Given these circumstances, it would be foolish to assume that the mullahs in Teheran can be discouraged from using nuclear weapons once they acquire them. "

It's not sufficient that the "average" Iranian might be freedom-loving, might "love" the U.S., might have normal and peaceful ambitions for life, employment, and a family.

Not when their nation is controlled by mullahs (and their ilk) who take this sort of thing seriously.

3/1

re: "Islamic Fundamentalism in the German Federal Republic "

Andrew G. Bostom provided a translation at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war.").

Money quote(s):

"Binswanger’s seminal 1977 study examined the discriminatory and degrading conditions imposed upon non-Muslim “dhimmis” — predominantly Christians — subjugated under the Ottoman Turkish sharia in the 16th century. His analysis elucidated the key role played by the creation of Muslim “satellite” colonies during the Islamization of these vanquished Christian societies:

"Geographic integrity is shattered by implanting Islamic nuclei.; The sectarian reference point of Dhimmi communities is removed, and further sectarian pruning occurs according to Islamic standards. The autonomy of Dhimmis is reduced to an insubstantial thing… They are driven out the moment that Islamic nuclei appear in the area. Dhimmis’ possession of their churches is granted. These are closed or razed the as soon as a mosque is established in their neighborhood…Regulations in the social area…demoralize the individual: [they] are consciously instituted for their degradation. The social environment of the Dhimmis is characterized by fear, uncertainty and degradation." "

This model has been replicated again and again. After all, it worked.

"Arguably the most accomplished (and easily the most unapologetic) scholar of how the Ottoman Turks progressively imposed the sharia on non-Muslims, Binswanger became alarmed by the obvious modern parallels to that phenomenon he observed in the behaviors of their contemporary Turkish descendants in Germany.

Twenty-one years later, the author and veteran television journalist Joachim Wagner published his analysis of the parallel Sharia-based Islamic “legal” system burgeoning in Germany, entitled Richter ohne Gesetz (“Judges without Laws”). Wagner’s alarming investigation — summarized in English during a two-part Der Spiegel series — demonstrates how what he terms “Islamic shadow justice” undermines Germany’s Western constitutional legal system, ultimately abrogating even German criminal law. Joachim Wagner’s contemporary study has lead him to conclude that even the ostensibly limited application of Sharia arbitration within Germany’s Muslim community nullifies the state’s Western conception of legal justice." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

Read the whole thing.

2/29

re: "Losing Our Senses"

Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war.") noted the logical (and grammatical) fallacies.

Money quote(s):

"Those of us who follow the progress of Islamization on both sides of the Atlantic have observed in recent months the remarkable successes realized by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in achieving its agenda. By focusing on “Islamophobia”, the OIC has skillfully pushed all the available guilt buttons on government officials, academics, and the media. The fear of being seen as racist or intolerant trumps everything else. Getting with the OIC program is the path of least resistance — follow it, and you are guaranteed to feel good about yourself. Even better, you are less likely to be sued by CAIR."

Remember. A "phobia" is an irrational fear of something.

"The concept of “violent extremism” is the height of absurdity. Extreme what?" (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

Extreme (we're-not-allowed-to-say), of course.

"Without a substantive to modify, the adjective “extreme” is worse than incoherent — it is without linguistic or semantic meaning. This is the depth to which our official policy-making has sunk."

To be fair, adding "-ism" (and dropping the silent "e") does transform the adjective "extreme" into the noun "extremism." It doesn't add any semantic content, mind you (as the good Baron helpfully pointed out), but it does make it a noun of some sort.

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/08/losing-our-senses.html

8/27

re: "How Will It End?"

Dymphna continued hosting Zenster's guest-posting, Part the Third, at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war.").

(Advisory to readers: The following excerpted passages incorporate several prime examples of "thinking-about-the-unthinkable." Old "Cold Warriors" will be familiar with the concept. Others may have difficulty wrapping their minds around the idea that not thinking about something may actually increase the likelihood of that "unthinkable" something actually coming to pass.)

Money quote(s):

"Islam has cozened its way into Western civilization and, parading under false colors as an alleged religion, it flies a counterfeit Liberal standard of interfaith Multiculturalism. Besotted with its own temporary successes and newfound “purity” ― through a recent reformation leaving it even more violent, intolerant, misogynistic and puritanical ― Islam is in the process of infiltrating Western civilization to an unprecedented degree."

More and more in the West the reality that Islam more than simply a religion, as we in the West have come to understand what a religion is.

"Islam imprudently brings itself into proximity with danger and eventually this will prove its own undoing. Suffused with delusions of adequacy, Muslims think nothing of constantly antagonizing Western powers who long ago perfected industrialized warfare to an extent that Islam can only dream of, despite its supremacist fantasies."

Writers and thinkers such as Ralph Peters ("Uncle Ralph" would smile to see himself so characterized.) have explored the possible consequences of an Islamic "misunderestimating" of Western ruthlessness in the scientific application of industrialized violence.

"Islam casts outsized shadows which too many in the West mistake for genuine military potency. The exact opposite is true and it is only by using the asymmetrical warfare of terrorism that Islam holds any sway."

Terrorism, like sarcasm, is the weapon of the weak.

"One glimpse of how Islam remains almost entirely reliant upon Political Correctness to drive its Western agenda reveals that this parasitic entity’s success wholly depends upon the frailty of a civilization debilitated by Multiculturalism and self-doubt. This is underscored both by the physical compulsion and violence that lies beneath so much of Islamic doctrine and the fact that no nation in history has ever voluntarily adopted Islam without an application of force being involved."

Don't believe that last part? Read history.

"Little do Liberals understand how they will be among the first who go to the wall should Islam prevail. Nor, in their haste to disarm the world, do they understand that such military ineptitude on their part will see them left with few responses other than nuclear Armageddon when confronted by WMD terrorist strikes. Through appeasement and facilitation, Liberals are Islam’s most dangerous “friends”."

Conventional warfare, particularly if waged on a global basis, is simply too expensive a proposition (for even a continental power with a population in the hundreds of millions) if it has the already developed and weaponized a nuclear capability.

The start-up, R&D, and production infrastructure costs are huge, but once they become sunken costs, the unit costs for nuclear weapons are, relative to mass conventional armies, smaller for a larger "bang."

"This inordinate cost of conventional war needed to obtain even a modicum of peace is, perhaps, the grimmest thing about Islam’s future. As the mask slips and “radical” or “fundamentalist” Islam are revealed to be mainstream and fully compatible with regularly accepted Islamic doctrine, Total War ― something Muslims continue to boast of declaring against the West ― looms evermore probable. However, the economic factors alone point directly away from conventional war.

Truth be told, in the absence of that $96 trillion dollars, there is only unconventional warfare left as a survival option. Nuclear weapons represent the sole existing and cost-effective way of managing hostilities with some 1.6 billion people. Like a proverbial trout in the milk pail, this one simple fact is difficult to ignore. Basic economics dooms perpetually hostile Islam to utter annihilation.

Any expectation of Islam pacifying, moderating or reforming itself must be dismissed out of hand. Islam has already undergone a recent reformation from which it emerged as an even more intolerant, more violent, more puritanical and more misogynistic creed. Those Muslims who do seek any pacification or sincere moderation of Islam’s violent doctrine are usually put to death by more devout believers." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

The figure of "$96 trillion dollars" is arrived at by Zenster through a calculation, based upon the costs of the conventional campaigns waged in Iraq and Afghanistan, if extended to the other fifty Islamic countries.

(CAA does not vouch for the math either way.)

Those hoping that Islam will, in a parallel with the history of Christianity in the West, undergo a moderating reformation have obviously missed how Islam's reformation had already taken place within the past two generations, and representated many awful steps backwards.

(CAA's knowledge of Orthodox Christianity is, alas, somewhat spotty and imperfect. Did the Eastern Orthodox Christian churches undergo anything paralleling the Western Reformation?)

"Recent events in Norway show that long before Muslims manage to demographically displace native Europeans there will begin a serious backlash against the Multiculturalists who have imposed this lethal burden upon the West. It is rather doubtful that American and European culture will go quietly into the Politically Correct Islamic night.

Ironically, as Muslims continue to financially drain the West ― through exorbitant military campaigns, increased security measures, petroleum sales and abuse of social benefits in host countries ― they only increase the eventual appeal of cost effective measures that will be required to subdue Islam. There will also come a time when Western nations begin to recoil at the prospect of sending any more soldiers to die for the sake of letting Muslims erect yet another shari’a government and terrorist production facility.

Complicating all of this is how the concept of military deterrence is essentially nonfunctional as regards Islam. A culture that glorifies and worships death is more than difficult to deter. For every bit that the West shrinks from waging Total War, the necessity of posing an existential threat to Islam only increases. When it comes to the ineffectuality of deterrence, no better example exists that of modern day Iran. The ramifications of Ahmadinejad’s tutelage under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini pose some serious issues."

CAA does not fall into the analytic bias that suggests Iran (more precisely, Iran's governmental and non-governmental leadership) is an irrational actor.

Nonetheless, CAA holds that any deterrence analysis of Iran must consider that the rationality of Iran's leadership is not based upon the sort of academic and think-tankery games theory so-beloved in Western capitals.

Mirror-imaging is not your friend!

"(M)ost of his cabinet have little to no military experience. With their being so unlettered in war fighting doctrine, could it not be possible that these appeasers might abruptly discover ― after repeated military budget cuts ― that massive nuclear retaliation was their sole playing card? Again, pro-disarmament Liberals rate as the most dangerous kind of “friends” that Islam could have.

Repulsive in the extreme is how truly avoidable this looming Muslim holocaust really is. A far less costly program of “wetwork” style targeted assassinations directed at the top echelons of Islam’s clerical, political, scholastic and financial aristocracy could see global jihad quickly screech to a grinding halt." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

Here you really see some more of that "thinking-the-unthinkable" about which CAA cautioned, over and above considering the nuclear possiblities.

Statecraft, and strategy, ain't beanbag.

The United States' proscriptions against assassinations are, essentially, self-imposed.

Furthermore, in light of the increasing popularity of "targeted killing" within the closed circles of our national decision- and policy-making elites, do not represent so much of a policy-reversal as a nearly-natural progression.

"It is more than safe to say that an industrially and militarily unlettered Islam is not going to take over the world using such a feeble tool as terrorism. As was also noted in Part II, Islam is assembling too many enemies too fast and that pace far outstrips any ability of theirs to perfect the mass production of intricate nuclear weapons nor muster fighting forces of even marginal proficiency. Chronic overreach is a hallmark of Islam and its habit of poking at the Western nuclear dragon with its terrorist pointed wooden stick bodes especially unwell for Muslims everywhere." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

Like those who see declining fertility rates in North African (and other majority-Muslim countries) as signs that the Western demographic collapse need not mean replacement by an Islamic majority within the next several decades, this estimate may be overly optimistic.

"Remember that for eight long years, Iran and Iraq fought to a bloody stalemate using chemical weapons and even ten year-old boys as human minesweepers. Less conservative estimates cite up to a million Muslim fatalities with both nations sending the flower of their youth into an insatiable meat grinder. Now, consider how America rolled up Iraq’s sidewalks in two weeks. This is the “reality gap” confronting Islam and its delusory vision of world domination. No such thing will ever happen.

Given that the global caliphate is forever out of reach, whither Islam? What of its obsessive quest for global supremacy? Handily, Israel provides us with a micro synopsis of the macro global problem. Imagine a tiny nation like Costa Rica routinely beating America’s military posterior like a cheap dime store drum. That is the equivalent of Israel defeating the combined military might of Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. Please remember that, in Arab culture, humiliation is worse than death. Abandoning conventional warfare in favor of terrorism, the Arab nations intentionally selected a strategy of low-intensity conflict whose upper limit would not trigger direct intervention by the global community." (Emphasis in the original text. - CAA.)

CAA would quibble about that "upper limit." A repeat attack against U.S. targets on par with the death tolls from 9/11 seems to me to be as likely to invite a devastating and disproportionate response as one whose casualties were orders of magnitude higher.

CAA suspects that the American public's reaction, even in the face of presidential pronouncements about Islam's inherent peacefulness, would be more on the order of "fool-me-twice, shame-on-me."

"Few people understand that any sort of “negotiated peace” with Israel would serve to unravel the entire Islamic Arab consciousness. Reaching even the least sort of peace agreement would be a frank admission that jihad had failed. Furthermore, any recognition of a Jewish state would contravene the genocidal doctrine that is a cornerstone of Islam. Acceptance of Israel’s continued existence contradicts Islamic canon on so many levels that any such thing is unimaginable.

Piled on top of this is Israel’s continuous string of military victories against often overwhelming Arab forces. How then to explain that away without an indisputable annihilation of Israel tucked under their Islamic belt? Deprived of any concrete proof that Islam actually can prevail against the eternally hated Jew, please do not begin to imagine that there will be any near term cessation of hostilities, if ever.

Thus we are presented with the micro model of global terrorism. Withdrawal, surrender, in fact, peace of any sort with Islam is simply out of the question. In reality, Islam offers nothing that remotely resembles an actual “peace treaty”. Instead, there is only hudna, a temporarily cessation of hostilities that is specifically designed to permit Muslims the rearming needed to then break that “truce” at their convenience. Whither Israel … whither the global community where Islam is concerned.

So long as the West does not pose an existential threat to Islam’s continued presence on earth, there will be no accommodation of any sort. This is the bottom line. That degree of political will is sorely lacking in the West and, even if it existed, there is little likelihood that anyone involved would appreciate how any such pact with the unbelievers would be broken at the first instant of advantage for Islam."

9/21

re: "Why Will It End?"

Zenster guest-posts the second essay of a three part series at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war.").

Money quote(s):

"Why Will it End?

Short answer ― Islam has “unhappy ending” written all over it.

Tragically, for Islam there is no possibility of a happy ending. It has often been said that the only peace which Islam ― famously known as “The Religion of Peace” ― offers anyone is the peace of the grave."

Islam means "submission" (to the will of Allah). Which is not how CAA defines "peace." Especially when said will tends to interpreted (and enforced) on the ground by what is essentially mob rule.

"The Islamic concept of takfir (“impure”), literally assures this in that a more devout Muslim is religiously sanctioned for killing a less pure Muslim. This lack of purity could be interpreted as someone who does not pray all five times a day or consumes food during daylight hours over the course of Ramadan. The possible paths descending into Islamic “impurity” are as numerous as they are varied and it is an ironclad guarantee that Islam will always be torn by internecine violence.

Exacerbating this situation is the West’s collective inability to discern Islam in general and why there is so little hope for it. It echoes the ancient parable about a group of blind men describing an elephant." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

Islam just seems so far away, for most folks. Even those Americans who've had the most exposure to it, our men and women in uniform, have to travel for days before they encounter it. And when they do, it's in environments that seem more like something out of Star Wars or John Carter on Mars than the Planet Earth they're accustomed to.

So until that halal shop or mosque opens up on your block, it's hard to believe islam has much to do with the West.

It's like war, in that way. You may not have much interest in it, but it's very interested in you.

"Islam is so voluminous and just sufficiently varied enough that it seems to defy description. This is especially so for the less informed who can but bear shocked witness to the endless discord and bloodshed that pervades the Islamic world."

Again, it appears to most Westerners as something you see on TV, like a movie or something that's not quite real. Until it is.

"Islam has routinely slithered away from history’s spotlight as the cause of ruined civilizations, genocides, mass enslavements and untold human suffering which transcend anything Europe or America ever aspired to in their wildest dreams.

Islam also manifests as a flag around which this world’s criminal elements continue to rally under a banner of religiously sanctioned murder, rape, pedophilia, looting and thieving which, terrorism aside ― as if that was even possible ― fills police blotters and drains global coffers with an almost enviable consistency unmatched by all but the most accomplished career politicians. Like any wall, Islam continually and everywhere builds enclaves which exclude unbelievers within their own domains and barricades Muslims from influences both external and even the threat of internal “westernization” that just as often sees young Muslim women murdered by their own families in so-called “honor killings”."

These would be some of those uncomfortable (even "inconvenient") truths that don't become apparent until it's much too late. Unless, of course, one reads history and pays attention to the news that's not on their local TV station.

"Islamic hijra has thrust Muslims deep within Western civilization only see them infect every last institution with their steady subversion of Constitutional rights and basic liberties. Hackneyed cries of “racism” and “Islamophobia” ― as if a fear of Islam could ever be irrational ― are trotted out in response to every legitimate criticism of Islam; even as Muslims set about stifling free speech and freedom of expression around the world." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

This is why "Exhibit 3-85" (from the Holy Land Foundation trial) should be required reading.

(Don't be afraid; the English translation starts about midway down the document, p. 15.)

"Compounding all of this havoc are the Islamic “principles” of kitman and taqiyya. They amount to religiously sanctioned deceit and outright lying. As if this were not bad enough, the situation is further exacerbated by Mainstream Media’s adamant refusal to provide accurate and unbiased reporting about Islam’s seditious goal of toppling Constitutional democracies throughout the West.

Islam remains a predatory entity that has not been able to establish any self-sustaining degree of industry or technology for almost a millennium. It has relied upon piracy and looting for nearly the entire span of its existence." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

The Islam "package" of the koran, sharia law, and the various elements of Arabic cultural imperialism that accompany it can be seen as somewhat like a computer program or even a computer virus. The multiple memes and re-inforcing behaviors comprise a sort of meta-meme that acts (and re-acts) to extend the area and population under its sway. In a sense, it's frankly an amazing and elegant piece of business.

"One immense irony is that ― despite Islam’s aspirations for a global caliphate ― it is unhealthy for too many unbelievers to be converted into Muslims. Once this happens, the jizya (“poll tax”) can no longer be collected, nor can possessions, businesses or estates be confiscated so readily. There have already occurred phases in Islamic history where further conversion of natives living in occupied lands was discouraged as it interfered with the appropriation of wealth that is central to financing more jihad. It is also vital to remember that any refusal to pay the jizya is punishable by immediate death.

Conversely, there is a twin principal to jizya known as hijra which derives from the Arabic word for “migration” or “flight”. In this case, it is a that strategy involves flooding Muslim immigrants into those Western nations which cannot be overcome militarily. Displaying a regular pattern of behavior, these new arrivals ― in strict accord with Islamic law ― refuse to assimilate or integrate and form exclusively Muslim enclaves while gradually instituting shari’a law whenever possible.

This form of demographic warfare is commonly known as “stealth” or “soft” jihad and it is the strategy of choice for many within Islam who seek to conquer the West."

Again, Exhibit 3-85 invites much closer reading. Zenster isn't just making this stuff up out of hairballs.

"This is nothing other than a process of colonization and it is reflected in how non-Muslims are routinely driven out of these enclaves through threats of violence, boycotts and extortion. Furthermore, when a sufficient population density is attained, even visiting non-Muslims are subjected to physical assault and threats of violence should they stray into one of these “no-go zones”. Due to Islamic polygamy, such population densities arrive far sooner than typical demographics for the host nations involved.

Once established, there begins a process of draining financial support from local or central government. This is in addition to criminal predation upon surrounding neighborhoods in the form of robbery, theft and extortion. Due to purdah ― the confinement and isolation of Muslim women ― typically there is a surge in the pimping, sexual assault and rape of non-Muslim women in areas around these enclaves. Minors are especially vulnerable to this because of how Islam regards Mohammad’s marriage to his six year-old child bride, Aisha, as a model of perfect conduct. Central to any understanding of Islam is that this entire process is one of obtaining tribute (jizya) from unbelievers.

This tribute is regarded as being their automatic due in that Muslims consider themselves to be the world’s Master Race. A proper understanding of Islam cannot be had without recognizing this one central point." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

9/21

re: "When Will It End?"

Zenster guest-posted at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war."), courtesy of Dymphna, with Part one of an essay series.

Money quote(s):

"When Will it End?

Short answer ― It will end when the tipping point is reached.

This tipping point can be defined as follows:

When living with Islam becomes more trouble than living without Islam." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

Zenster goes on to develop this idea through a cost analysis.

"If it was possible to set aside terrorism-related loss of life ― and it most certainly is not ― the financial cost alone of combating it is absurd. Let us examine just one single factor; increased waiting times at airports. An extra hour or three doesn’t seem like much until you start doing the math.

Some 1.5 million passengers per day originate from American airports. Domestic flights have a one hour minimum wait time and international travel requires an early check in of at least three hours. We will split the difference and use an average of two hours wait. Even though a majority of domestic flights are not international, please rest assured that this slightly top-heavy coefficient will barely compensate for many other downstream factors.

Two hours of wait time multiplied by 1.5 million passengers equals 3 million working hours lost due to increased airport waiting periods. Airport WiFi services do not begin to counteract these losses in productivity because of how fax machines and other appurtenances of regular business life are usually inaccessible near the tarmac. That represents 3 million hours of lost productivity each and every day just in America alone." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

Zenster continued totaling up this cost estimate for a worldwide expense of over a trillion dollars.

"In a sense, it is as if Islam has found a cunning way of forestalling its own dismantling at the hands of increasingly vexed Western powers. Those one trillion dollars in annual airline security-related waiting times could finance the overturning of yet one more Muslim majority nation per year. Recall, how this is just the global expense of increased airport waiting times that is being discussed." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

There are many other costs, including those of opportunities lost.

"The overall cost burden of Islam’s culture upon Western social benefit structures, law enforcement apparatus and ― via incessant and frequently frivolous Islamic “lawfare” ― its judicial system, is orders of magnitude higher; as will be shown in the subsequent parts of this article. Taken together, these otherwise unnecessary monetary outlays could finance punitive military campaigns against Islam or, as a less bellicose alternative, sponsor all of the needed scientific research into alternative fuels that could render MME (Muslim Middle East), control of oil production moot and unprofitable."

These are all "hidden costs." That is, except for the occasional statistical report from one of a few Western European countries that notes how much of their crimes are committed by, or other prisons inhabited by, those of an Islamic "immigrant background," the increased costs get overlooked. But they are not insignificant.

"Not even the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq ― both of which were directed at proven sources of international terrorism ― can be counted as truly effective responses to Islam’s assault upon the West. These so-called “liberations” have gone on to see each country cheerfully adopt shari’a-based constitutions which guarantee they will once again revert to being terrorist manufactories the instant that Western troops depart."

Afghanistan and Iraq are/were only individual theatres or campaigns in the larger war against the enemy only identified as "Terror." We will continue to see the fruits of our reluctance to properly identify and name our adversaries.

"Islamic terrorism will end. It is both unsustainable and an intolerable burden upon the civilized world. Ending it is a matter of obtaining sufficient political willpower and an educated electorate that will no longer put up with ineffectual Politically Correct politicians who continue to ignore, obfuscate or simply deny the need to eliminate such a monstrous drag on global progress."

9/21

re: "The Multi-Layered Betrayal of Britain"

Paul Weston at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war.") breaks this down by generational cohort.

Money quote(s):

"Poor old Britain is in a terrible state. Whilst the recent obscenity of a Labour government is mostly to blame for this, they were not alone in the cultural and racial war which has been waged against the British people over the last half-century. Such has been the all-encompassing assault on who we once were that it is now hard to find any social group which has not been betrayed."

Read the whole thing.

7/12

re: "Are These the Labour Pains of a New Renaissance?"

Seneca III had an essay posted at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war.").

Money quote(s):

"(T)the giant Ponzi scheme that is European monetary union is on the verge of a well-deserved and long overdue collapse. It was always going to fail, of course, because it is a false construct designed not for the financial and fiscal benefit of the ordinary men and women of the Union but in order to enable the ushering in of a continent-wide socialist police state by means of subterfuge and stealth.

And, as is always thus with false constructs, it never did need to be destroyed from without, for the seeds of its destruction were sown in its very foundations by those political pornographers who created it. These legislative and executive elites, drunk on the dopamine of power, wallowing in hubris as they looted the coffers for their personal benefit — they exalted in the mutual masturbation of their own egos as the little people were left to go about their meaningless lives ignored or at best humoured, of no consequence to the peddlers of this embryonic New World Order.

Fatefully for the deconstructionists, they forgot about or refused to acknowledge the inherent power and utter ruthlessness of the desperate, of the people of whom for so long they had been so contemptuous, and who are now in the process of casting off their chains."

The "European Project" began with the most noble of aims, the prevention of future intra-European conflagrations such as the two world wars of the 20th century.

It can be argued that it's been successful, but it must also be admitted that it did not operate in a vacuum.

Little things like NATO, the United States, "containment," the Marshall Plan, nuclear weapons, and two generations of U.S. soldiery standing watch along the intra-German frontier (that sort of thing) had more than a little to do with it.

"(T)he great Global Warming scam (a revealed belief system built on nameless fear and used to justify and enable the transfer of the fruit of our labours into the pockets of Multinational Industrialists, third world kleptocrats and offshore bankers) is now in its third incarnation, and stumbling as more and more of its premises are exposed as creative wishful thinking rather than the rational analysis of a few and often contradictory physical facts."

For the millions who now get their news primarily from the internet rather than through the traditional major media outlets (primarily TV networks and daily newspapers), this will not come as a surprise. Still, like any ancient religion, the beliefs die out only when the believers (eventually) do.

I still cringe when I hear otherwise genuinely bright people talk about AGW, &tc., as if were "settled science." It's embarrassing. I'm embarrassed for them.

"(T)he collective atrocity that is Multiculturalism, asylum-seeking, and immigration — those seemingly innocuous categorisations of the deliberate, iniquitous process of our ethnic cleansing — is more and more being seen for what it is, and more and more of us have lost our fear of saying so in public and on public forums. For the vanguard and principal protagonist, Islam, events are moving in such a fashion that under cover of the coming storm it is quite likely a non-Westphalian solution will come to pass. They would be wise to leave now, whilst they still can."

Seneca III is clearly expecting another greater European war, and his "non-Westphalian solution" phrase puts me in mind of the differing viewpoints on the "Eurabia myth" discussion, as regards Ralph Peters, Mark Steyn, and Tom Kratman.

In other words, somewhere that Western Civilization would really rather not ever go again.

Not to say it won't or can't, given that Western Civilization remains stubbornly composed of hundreds of millions of individuals (perhaps even a billion or more) daily making their choices and decisions, on a planet where billions more of folks follow their own lights about things.

It's an ugly place where signposts are marked "internment," "ethnic cleansing," "displaced persons," "internal refugees," and ultimately "concentration camps" and "genocide."

So it would be well worth the effort to find some other alternate courses of action (so long as they aren't categorizable as either "surrender" or "civilizational suicide").

11/3

re: "Islam Does Not Belong in Europe"

Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war.") shared the translation of an essay in German.




6/29

re: "I Love the Swiss"

LTCOL P at OPFOR ("Fair Specimens of Citizen Soldiers...") proposed the following:

"Think Swiss. Act Swiss."

Here's why:

"The Swiss have a long tradition of muscular self-defense, and are now intent on beefing up the size and strength of their army. …"

6/27

re: "An Alpine Superpower?"

Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war.") noted a limited outbreak of rationality in Europe.

Money quote(s):

"The European Union’s lack of military capability has made it somewhat of a joke in recent years. Among the various member states of the EU there are some exceptions — Denmark comes to mind — but, generally speaking, Western Europe lacks the capacity to defend itself without the help of the United States. If the American hegemon were to withdraw or collapse, Europe would become vulnerable to foreign predation long before it could rearm.

Not so Switzerland. The Swiss have a long tradition of muscular self-defense, and are now intent on beefing up the size and strength of their army."

Our NATO allies have continued cashing their peace dividend checks long past the end of actual peace. Witness their limited capabilities in support of whatever their Libyan objectives actually were.

So, while in absolute terms calling Switzerland a "superpower" is a bit of a stretch, in comparison with their neighbors, perhaps not so much of a stretch.

"In defiance of all European trends to saving, there will again be 100,000 soldiers prepared to defend the country."

(6/26)

re: "The Ideology of Pestilence"

Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war.") explains how conspiracy is not necessary when consensus suffices.

Money quote(s):

"To conceive of the Islamic invasion as a centrally-directed process is to misunderstand its nature and impose a Western model of behavior on the collective psychological, social, and political actions of Muslims.

Overall Islamic strategy is not coherent and well-organized, no matter how shrewd and effective any of its individual actors and groups may be. To conceive of it as a political entity with a dictator or single decision-making body is to miss the point.

Islam is effective precisely because it is a distributed phenomenon, and utilizes what might be called a micro-ideology — a small set of easily-understood instructions that are encoded and replicated in hundreds of millions of minds across the length and breadth of the Ummah." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

Author Tom Kratman says something similar about transnational progressivism; that it's not necessary for there to be a conspiracy, only a widely-accepted consensus about a world-view.

"The exploitation of the infidel may involve a full violent jihad. It may also take the form of razzia — armed raids, pillaging, looting, rapine, and destruction.

In 21st-century Europe, Canada, and the United States, however, the preferred method is what has been called the “stealth jihad” — the gradual but steady infiltration, occupation, and subversion of Western countries.

This does not need to be a hierarchically-arranged and centrally-directed process to be effective. In fact, a full onslaught organized by an outside political entity would be detected and countered, because this is the traditional form of political conflict which the West recognizes, and in which it is supreme.

The stealth jihad in all its forms is the only strategy which can conquer the West, and it is very effective indeed, since our political systems have no template that includes it. We cannot fit it into any conceptual framework, and seem unable or unwilling to devise a new one that would allow us to deal with it effectively." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

The Muslim Brotherhood actually developed, and U.S. law enforcement discovered, the plan for an Islamic takeover of the U.S. Set your search engine for the Holy Land Foundation trial and take a look at was was entered into evidence. Or peruse some of my earlier posts with the Muslim Brotherhood tag.

"Most of the boat people who arrive on Lampedusa or Pantelleria do not view themselves as the vanguard of an Islamic invasion. They come with all the various motivations that you would expect from a group of poverty-stricken and mostly illiterate refugees — fear of repression and violence back home, a desperate search for a better means of subsistence, the desire to take advantage of the legendary bounty of Europe, etc.

However, since they carry within themselves the encoded instructions of Islamic micro-ideology, their modus operandi will be one of rapacious exploitation. They will have no moral scruples of the sort that a Westerner would understand, and feel no shame or embarrassment about being indolent parasites upon their infidel hosts — the simplified Islam they bring with them tells them that this is exactly their due, their basic right as members of a superior social group living amidst their inferiors.

Individual behavior driven by this imperative, when multiplied by thousands or millions, aggregates into an Islamic conquest. Not necessarily suddenly. It doesn’t have to happen all at once. Gradually, over decades, there are more and more Muslims. Always taking, taking, taking from the kuffar. Slowly, imperceptibly, as they become more numerous, our system fades away and is replaced by theirs.

In the long run, Islamic exploitation always fails. The parasite always kills its host. The process takes centuries — the glory of the Persians and the Byzantines persisted for a long time after the Islamic conquest. But in the end their lights guttered and died, and they became corrupt and backward satrapies until the magic of petroleum revived them."

This process is well understood among leading Islamic scholars. Witness a recent call, in the interests of ending Egyptian poverty, for the taking of loot, booty, and slaves from the (infidel) West.

re: "BREAKING: NATO Airstrike On Gaddafi Home Kills Son But Not Colonel Crazy"

DrewM. at Ace of Spades HQ questions the targeting.

Money quote(s):

"So, I'm still unclear if the purpose of the NATO mission is to topple the regime and/or kill Gaddafi or just protect civilians. I'm not a military expert but I'm not clear on how bombing someone's home protects civilians hundreds of miles away. Actually, I do (no Gaddafi, no danger) but I was told by the President that killing Gaddafi wasn't part of our military strategy. It's almost like Obama and the rest of the NATO leaders are saying one thing but acting very differently."

&

"Now suddenly talking out of your ass about policy and military goals is a good thing, Smart Diplomacy one might say.

Let's just be honest...we want this guy dead and we're going to kill him. Is that so hard?"

_____

Interestingly, the casualty list from this attack needs an update:

"Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi revealed that Col. Muammar Qaddafi’s son was not really killed by a NATO attack on the Gheddafi family compound. He says that intelligence information indicates that Khadafi fils was not even in Libya at the time of the attack, and that the Colonel’s grandchildren were also unharmed."

_____

Hat tip to Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war.").

re: "Muslim Immigration into the UK: Part Three"

El Ingles (writing as Pike Bishop) at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war.") fleshes out Ralph Peter's scenario for Britain.

Money quote(s):

"Normally, technologically and economically more advanced peoples colonize peoples who are less advanced in these regards. This is why, try as they might, the native American Indians could not effectively oppose, much less reverse, the colonization they underwent at the hands of the British and other European peoples. However, in our case, the opposite will be true, as our colonization will be taking place at the hands of technologically and economically inferior peoples who, barring the odd Afghan on the back of a truck, have to be let in by our immigration apparatus to be here at all.

What this means, in a nutshell, is that this colonization will take place only as long as we allow it to, and we will not allow it forever. Eventually we will completely cast aside the various psychological restraints that have been imposed upon us (and without which said colonization could never have occurred at all), resist it, and, at least to some extent, reverse it. There are only two ways this can happen: a) in a relatively orderly and civilized fashion, when a government with the political will to deal with the problem finally comes to power, or b) in an exceptionally violent and brutal fashion, with government playing by no means the only role, and perhaps not even a particularly large one.

It would be asinine to argue that something of this nature could not happen in modern Europe when we have so recently witnessed similar events in the Balkans."

Ralph Peters surfaced this possibility in his much-discussed New York Post article.

"The war that awaits us is tribal war, and we assure our readers that it does not consist of generals exchanging pleasantries before battle, folk riding forth and shooting at each other a bit, and some backslapping over a glass of port at the end. Rather, it consists of people identifying entire communities as their enemies and more or less indiscriminately killing them off until the threats they are perceived to constitute have been reduced to acceptable levels, whatever those levels may be. It is surely one of the greatest failures in the history of (supposedly) democratic government as an institution that so many otherwise prosperous, peaceful European countries have been deliberately hurling themselves along this path despite the fact that the eventual outcome must have been reasonably obvious from the start, and is painfully so now.

When such tribal conflict breaks out in Britain (and it certainly cannot be avoided without radical changes to immigration and other policies), the only way for it to come to an end will be for the overwhelming majority of the Muslim population of Britain to leave permanently. There will be no Good Friday Agreement to bring it to an end, and, for deep structural reasons, no equivalent agreement can exist."

Tom Kratman explored a similar possibility in his 2010 novel Caliphate.

"It will be clear to the British people in the case of tribal conflict between them and their Muslim fifth column that defeat will result in the disappearance of their civilization, their way of life, and their existence as a people. Accordingly, they will have to win it, which means they will have to do what needs to be done to win it, which means they will have to do a great many violent and unpleasant things, things that, though quite inconceivable to many at present, will seem right and obvious to most when the nature of the conflict has become sufficiently clear.

We would like to avoid this, but feel that the window of opportunity is closing rather more quickly than some might imagine. Our greatest concern is that, despite the growing anger and alarm on the part of the British people with respect to mass immigration in general and Muslim immigration in particular, these feelings might not give rise to the necessary coalescence of political will on the part of our elected representatives in time to try and prevent the horrendous future that otherwise awaits us. We say again that the only course of action that gives us the slightest chance of avoiding the horrors outlined here is that of shutting down Muslim immigration and refusing to subsidize the higher Muslim fertility that is pushing us towards the brink."

Boldface added for emphasis.

"There is no theological or legal distinction in Islam between ‘moderates’ and ‘radicals.’ These terms are part of a Western discourse which seeks to grapple with the alarming possibility that a religion adhered to, more or less strictly, by approximately 20% of the world’s population, is fundamentally antithetical to everything good in our way of life. Trying to define a moderate Muslim is an exercise in futility."

Moderate Muslims are some of those things you know when you see them. Like my former uniformed comrades-in-arms, serving their adopted country whether it makes their imam happy or not.

"(L)aws, treaties, and the like are human constructs and therefore open to being changed by human efforts on the basis of human concerns. And changed they will be, sooner or later. If it disapproves, the EU will just have to invade us and show us the error of our ways."

El Ingles raises a good intellectual point. Only the the Ten Commandments were carved by the finger of God onto the faces of stone tablets. Pretty much everything else is the creation of mankind, and subject to revocation, rebuttal, or revision.

(To those who would assert that the Koran, in its classic Arabic version, is the literal perfect word of Allah, I must demur, since that is a matter of faith and I am not a Muslim.)

"It must be observed that all real debts have certain characteristics, most obviously principals (initial amounts owed), and interest rates. If one believes that, once upon a time, Britain owed a debt of some sort to recently independent peoples in ex-British Empire territories, then one must give some idea of the size of the debt, the rate at which that debt accrued interest, and the conditions that would have to be satisfied for that debt to have been fully paid off. In the absence of this information, the ‘debt’ becomes nothing more than an instrument of moral intimidation."

The parallels to the perennial issue of slavery reparations are obvious.

Further, in the U.S. we're not subjected to this particular version of guilt infliction, but rather assertions of the obvious and unassailable virtues of "diversity."

Uh huh.

"(M)any ex-British territories have either stagnated or gone backwards since the Union Jack ceased to fly over them. Many of their people are desperate to leave them, which means that they are desperate to leave the conditions that they and their people have created."

Blaming colonialism will only get you so far.

"If the people of these countries are to flee them and, officially or unofficially, take refuge in a Western country like Britain, then they must, in some fashion, convince the British people to let them in. But given that they already have their own countries, they will have to come up with something especially persuasive. This is the ‘debt.’ None of the people who insist that they should be allowed into Britain because of this supposed debt have ever given the slightest thought to whether or not this debt might already have been paid off, because they have never taken their own argument seriously in the first place. It is simply what these folk say when they feel that access to the UK, for them or their compatriots back home, might be jeopardized."

Thus far, it is not yet a principle of international human rights law that guarantees free movement of peoples irrespective of sovereign national borders. Yet.

"None of this should be taken to imply that there never was any debt at all. Rather, it means that when this debt mysteriously refuses to go away no matter how many immigrants are allowed in, and no matter how much Britain is demographically transformed, then it has become a fake debt, an instrument used to cudgel the ex-imperial master around the head and induce him to allow the ex-imperial subjects to escape the squalor, corruption, poverty, and violence that, they now realize, tend to ensue when they are left to their own devices.

Our ex-imperial peoples wanted to be independent of us. Now they are, with everything that that implies. We wish them the best of luck in their own countries. But all debts are now paid."

I do rather like this simple, bookkeeping approach to debt. If someone is going to imply a debt is owed in order to collect some benefit from the debtor, then by all means lets quantify the current balance of that debt, and any rate of increase. That should be done before paying even a cent.

"(I)f Turkey ever becomes a full member of an EU that Britain is still a member of, with the Turks being granted full freedom of movement across all the EU member states, then the British people will simply have to revolt. If this be treason, rest assured we shall make the most of it."

Britain has already had the joy of seeing many thousands of non-EU citizens crossing the whole of Europe to the coast of France in order to find some way to cross the channel into Britain's welfare state. That's to say nothing of the EU citizens who flock to take advantage of generous salaries, standards of living, and eventual unemployment benefits.

"If there is any particular reason for the British to allow themselves to be colonized by Muslims, whatever their provenance, now is the time for it to be explained."

re: "Gates of Vienna News Feed 2/7/2011"

Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.We are in a new phase of a very old war.") has a follow-on development on the big news from Munich this week.

Money quote(s):

“British Prime Minister David Cameron followed up on his declaration that Multiculturalism has failed in the UK by ordering the removal of funding from suspicious Muslim community groups. Such groups have previously received state funds in a bid to reach troubled youth and discourage them from turning to extremism, but the prime minister believes they may be soft on terrorism.”

This takes Angela Merkels comments about the failure of multiculturalism to another level entirely.

re: "Denmark Tightens Immigration Rules"

Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war.") relayed some heartening news from Denmark.

re: "Killing the Golden Goose"

Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war.") made some interesting points about Islam being an "Evolutionary Stable System" or ESS.

Money quote(s):

"(B)ecause the system is parasitic — it produces no wealth, but depends on booty, slave labor, and tribute to maintain itself — the environment must eventually change. When the host dies, so does the parasite. The ESS fails, and Islam reaches a dead end."

re: "The Turban Kissers"

Dymphna at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war.") posts an essay by "Zenster" that nicely develops a theme that'd occurred to me before, in idle moments, in the years since I first read "Rising Sun."

re: "Chump Change"

Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna ("At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war.") has an excellent explanation of currency and fractional reserves.

At least, from what I remember from my econ and finance classes that is.

Money quote(s):

"Today’s system of commercial and consumer credit is made possible by the practice of fractional reserve banking. Until the late 18th or early 19th century, banks did not lend out their cash reserves of depositors’ money. The advent of fractional reserve banking made it legal for a bank to lend out a portion of its deposits, and required it to keep only a fraction of those deposits — in modern times, typically 20% — as an actual cash reserve.

This means that when Joe Consumer deposits $1000 into his bank account, the bank can lend up to $800 of it and keep $200 of the deposit as a fractional reserve, maintaining the loan on its books as an asset. At this point the initial $1000 in cash has morphed into $1800 in cash assets and credit — in effect, $800 worth of money has been created.

When the borrower deposits the $800 into another bank, that bank in turn can loan out $640. And so the process continues, forming a geometric progression of assets which cannot exceed $5000 (500% of the original deposit), $4000 of that in loans listed as assets on the books of the respective banks.

This practice seems bizarre and imprudent at first glance, but it was absolutely essential during the expansion of our industrial economies. Industrialization created wealth where none existed before, but without a way to extend the money supply to match the added wealth, the capitalization of industry would have lagged, and growth would have been much slower. Fractional reserve lending allowed credit to be extended to industrial entrepreneurs, and as long as loans were made prudently and repaid on time, and banks retained their depositors’ confidence, the system functioned well."