North Korean Aggression, American Capitulation

“While the nuclear issues are the focus of the Congressional concerns, there are still some lingering old terrorism issues although North Korea has not been involve (sic) in terrorist attacks in recent years. Secretary of State George Shultz placed North Korea on the terrorism [watch list] after the bombing of Korean Airlines Flight 858 in 1987 by North Korean agents. North Korean operatives were also behind a 1983 attempt to kill South Korean President Chun Doo Hwan, who was scheduled to visit a memorial in Rangoon, Burma (now Myanmar. The timed bombs went off before his arrival, killing 17 South Korean dignitaries instead…

North Korea also had supported terrorist groups operating in the Middle East and Sri Lanka. For example a January, 2008 Congressional Research Service Brief, page 17, describes press reports that North Korea has provided arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka. Both groups are designated as foreign terrorist organizations by the U.S.

The reports fit a historic pattern. North Korea provided training and other assistance to a variety of terrorist groups in the 1960’s and 70’s including the Palestine Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine when it conducted major aircraft hijackings and other attacks and to the Japanese Red Army. These two groups staged a joint attack in 1972 that killed 24 persons including 16 American citizens from Puerto Rico when their plane landed in Israeli [sic] for a Christian pilgrimage.” — Michael B. Kraft, writing in the Counterterrorism Blog on June 27th, 2008

From Fox News, on October 11, 2008:

U.S. Removes North Korea From Terrorism List

DEVELOPING: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has signed a document that removes North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, FOX News confirmed Saturday.

 

This action came as North Korea agreed to the conditions of every nuclear inspection demand the Bush administration has sought. North Korea Meanwhile, from

has agreed to immediately begin disabling the Yongbyon nuclear facility, and allow inspectors back in.

The agreement is intended to salvage a faltering nuclear disarmament accord in the short time before President Bush leaves office in January.

Earlier, on October 11, 2008, from the LA Times:

 ”These days you don’t hear as many conflicting voices in South Korea on these issues. That’s reflective of the overall mood that this is an issue for the U.S. to take the lead on. The South Koreans are not going to rock the boat,” he said.

 

 

 

[...]

Snyder said South Korea regards the North’s recent maneuvers as a typical effort to increase its leverage.

America is denying the obvious about the North Korean government, electing a Marxist as its next president, doing nothing about the Russian menace, and recently sided with the Khmer Rouge against American citizens to boot.

When Vladimir Lenin announced the New Economic Policy (NEP) at the Ninth All-Russian Conference of the Communist Party (September 1920), he stated that — despite their nominal disapproval of the Communist political system — Americans could be counted on to hand over money to Communists. He further stated that Communists would come to dominate the world as a result of American compromises.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Joerg Haider, R.I.P.

Previously, TakeYourCross has lauded the recent rise of the Austrian Freedom Party and the Alliance for the Future of Austria.

It is with sadness that TakeYourCross excerpts the AP obituary of Alliance for the Future of Austria leader Joerg Haider:

Austrian politician Joerg Haider [...] died Saturday in a car accident. He was 58.

 

Haider was pronounced dead in a hospital shortly after his Volkswagen Phaeton veered off the road in southern Austria and overturned several times after he had passed another car, police said. Authorities said an initial investigation showed no signs of foul play.

“For us, it’s like the end of the world,” said Haider’s spokesman and the alliance’s secretary-general, Stefan Petzner.

At the time of his death, Haider was governor of the province of Carinthia and leader of the Alliance for the Future of Austria _ a party he formed after breaking away from the far right Freedom Party in 2005.

In 1999, Haider received 27 percent of the vote in national elections as leader of the Freedom Party, which ran an anti-immigrant campaign critical of European Union goals of opening membership to Eastern European countries.

[...]

Over the summer, he staged a comeback in national politics and helped his Alliance for the Future of Austria significantly improve their standing in Sept. 28 national elections.

He and his supporters had left the Freedom Party in 2005 to form the relatively moderate Alliance for the Future of Austria. The Freedom Party’s fall in popularity had been accompanied by growing infighting among party pragmatists and the rightist fringe that extended to people with links to neo-Nazi publications.

[...]

Earlier this week, Haider announced that had set up a facility in the remote mountains of southern Austria to handle asylum seekers suspected as criminals, saying they need to be isolated to protect the people in the area.

Haider had a history of taking a strong stand on asylum seekers, saying criminals among them drain the country’s resources and should be expelled.

Human rights experts expressed concern about the holding facility.

Haider, who was born Jan. 26, 1950 in Upper Austria, enjoyed tremendous popularity in the province of Carinthia. He was known by opponents and supporters alike as intelligent and politically savvy.

Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer described the longtime politician as someone who had shaped Austria’s domestic political landscape over decades.

Austrian President Heinz Fischer described Haider’s death as a “human tragedy.”

The impact of Haider’s death on Austrian domestic politics was not immediately clear. Just last week, he and Heinz-Christian Strache, leader of the Freedom Party, met for what appeared to be a successful attempt to put aside their personal differences in light of their combined success at the polls. Taken together, the results of their two parties came to 28.2 percent of the ballot _ putting them on nearly equal footing with the winning Social Democrats.

Strache said Haider introduced a completely new political style in the 1990s and contributed to making Austrian more democratic.

“Joerg Haider achieved great things … he was a great figure,” he said.

Haider is survived by his wife, two daughters and his mother, whose 90th birthday he and his family had planned to celebrate over the weekend.

“The One”: Who he is, and why he will win

From La Russophobe on October 10, 2008:

The latest news on the presidential elections front is that Barack Obama is a card-carrying communist who may be facing a racketeering investigation over his ties to a corrupt left-wing opposition group.  With that in mind, a little tour through the wit and wisdom of the man they call “The One.”

He thinks there are 58 states. “Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.” — Barack Obama

He talks to ghosts. “On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes — and I see many of them in the audience here today — our sense of patriotism is particularly strong.” — Barack Obama

He’s a cokehead. “I had learned not to care. I blew a few smoke rings, remembering those years. Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though. …” — Barack Obama

He wants to starve us. “We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.” — Barack Obama

He’s a racist. “That’s just how white folks will do you. It wasn’t merely the cruelty involved; I was learning that black people could be mean and then some. It was a particular brand of arrogance, an obtuseness in otherwise sane people that brought forth our bitter laughter. It was as if whites didn’t know that they were being cruel in the first place. Or at least thought you deserving of their scorn.” — Barack Obama

By the way, he’s a racist. “The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn’t. But she is a typical white person…” — Barack Obama

Yet Obama will be President. Why?

Jared Taylor wrote on July 25, 2008:

First, some support his policies. They want to end the war in Iraq, and they want the standard liberal program of socialized medicine, higher taxes, more handouts, and more government. There has always been a substantial minority of whites who vote this way, and they have a clear favorite in Mr. Obama.

Second, as many people have pointed out, an enormous number of whites think it is deeply virtuous to vote for a black—not for an out-and-out race man such as Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, but for an unthreatening, well-scrubbed black who speaks standard English and promises to “bring us together.” Even if they live sharply segregated lives, whites thrill to the language of “coming together,” and they adore blacks who don’t act or sound black.

For many whites, voting for Mr. Obama will be an act of high patriotism. Electing him will prove America is not “racist,” and many whites believe that rising above “racism” is America’s sacred calling. One must never underestimate the importance to whites of feeling virtuous. Most would rather lose a leg than be thought a “bigot,” and a vote for Obama is a painless way to burnish anti-racist credentials.

Third, young whites will line up for Mr. Obama. They have been swallowing anti-white, multi-culti propaganda all their lives and have not knocked around enough to discover it is false. Some who know their parents will vote for Mr. McCain will make a special point of voting for Mr. Obama. Every new generation thinks it is cooler, hipper, and wiser than any generation that ever lived, and what could be cooler, hipper, or wiser than putting a black man in the White House? For many young whites, a vote for Mr. Obama will be a denial of every uncool, unhip, and especially every even faintly race-realist thing their parents ever said or did.

Fourth, although the country seems to have a collective memory of no more than two weeks, Americans think everything is “historic.” Whenever someone breaks an obscure record in professional baseball we are told history was made. If you ask someone why he waited in line all night to buy the first Apple iPhone he will tell you it’s a “historic” product. Americans love anything that is “historic,” and for people who think a few more stolen bases are “history” right up there with the Battle of Lepanto, putting a black man in the White House will be the discovery of America, Pearl Harbor, and the Second Coming all rolled into one. Many whites will vote for Mr. Obama because they want to think they helped “make history.”

The media, which has its own grim reasons for supporting Mr. Obama, is mesmerized by the same prospect. Editors salivate at the thought of writing headlines like “History is Made” the day after the election, and some will lose all self-control and add an exclamation mark. The emphasis, of course, will be on Mr. Obama as the first black president, implying more to come. The media, which always subtly boost the Democrat, will be even more blatantly partisan this time, downplaying every blunder Mr. Obama makes and highlighting Mr. McCain’s.

Fifth, many whites will vote for Mr. Obama—or at least not vote for Mr. McCain—because the Republicans have nominated the most stunningly unattractive candidate in years. Old and pock-marked, Mr. McCain is thoroughly disliked in the Senate for arrogance that he cannot even hide from voters when he is not speaking from notes. He has dismayed Republicans by promoting amnesty for illegals, and dismayed everyone else by saying America should stay in Iraq for 100 years if it takes that long to “win.” Mr. Obama therefore has the enormous advantage of running against an opponent that not even Republicans like.

Mr. Obama will also crush Mr. McCain in face-to-face debates. Mr. McCain cannot put an unscripted sentence together any better than George W. Bush can, and will come across as a thick-witted geezer. Mr. Obama, who is as glib as any politician, gives credence to H.L. Mencken’s definition of democracy as “rule by orators.”

[...]

The final reason why whites will vote for Mr. Obama is that the Republicans do not have the backbone to attack him in the only way that would work. If they were serious, they would fill the airways with Jeremiah Wright prancing and raving, along with the message: “This is the man who married Mr. and Mrs. Obama, baptized their children, and whom Mr. Obama calls a ‘family member’.” They would buy radio ads quoting Michelle Obama’s thesis in which she says she will always be black first and American second. Mr. McCain has nothing like the stomach for a campaign like this.

[...]

In any case, Mr. Obama will win far more white votes than he will lose because he is black. Whites who don’t want a black president would not vote for a Democrat anyway. As for black voters, even nominal Republicans are said to be running for the doors, but strictly racial voting has always been fine for blacks. Not so for whites, of course. Just try telling your co-workers that you disagree with Mr. McCain but are voting for him because he is white.

Racially conscious whites will be in a quandary in November. Even if Mr. McCain’s policies are worse than Mr. Obama’s should they vote for the white man—one with an adopted Bangladeshi daughter and who long ago betrayed white interests? Even after years of being softened up with black heroes and figureheads, a black in the White House is a powerful symbol of white dispossession. A mulatto president is an almost explicit endorsement of miscegenation. This is bitter medicine.

Some whites have argued that a black president would undercut the charges of “racism” whites are forever facing, but they are dreaming. The entire government could look like a meeting of the Mystic Knights of the Sea, but as long as blacks are worse off than whites we will be blamed for it. Sensible whites cannot cheerfully vote for either man; I suspect most will stay home or vote for a minor candidate.

Aside from the symbolic impact, which cannot be calculated, will President Obama be much different from a President Hillary Clinton? She would lard her cabinet with blacks and Hispanics, nominate ultra-liberal judges, push for amnesty, grovel before non-whites everywhere, and load up the “civil rights” division of the Justice Department with anti-white sharks. She would certainly make a bigger fool of herself over Hispanics and Asians (see “Turning Up the Pressure,” AR, May 2008). Our choice, therefore, could not be more disagreeable. On balance, we get to decide which is the more degrading spectacle: deluded white people giving their country away or clear-eyed blacks helping themselves to it.

President Obama will, however, face special pressures. He can’t let the pushier brothers walk all over him, but he will have to throw them enough bones to keep them off his back. It will be a tricky balance. Mr. Obama’s first annual address to the NAACP will be a love feast, but every year after that it will be harder to explain why black unemployment, poverty, and incarceration rates haven’t changed at all.

Even Mr. Obama’s star-struck white supporters will eventually wonder what happened to all that “change” he promised. There is not going to be change. The system is far too stuck in its self-serving ways for that. With the help of an enlarged Democratic majority in Congress, Mr. Obama may set up some wheezing, byzantine form of socialized medicine, but no one will be happy with it. If Mr. Obama inherits a sick economy, a weak dollar, expensive oil, and shrinking revenues, Americans will not at all like the change they get.

On the bright side, with Mr. Obama we have a good chance of piquant First-Lady behavior. What will the White House be like with Michelle in charge? Will she want a new exterior paint job? How and whom will she entertain? Will the Big Man’s guest bedrooms—in the African tradition—be turned over to third cousins from Kenya and the South Side of Chicago? There is no telling with what improprieties large and small Mrs. Obama will entertain us as she makes up her mind whether she is an American.

It will be an edifying presidency; and whites may be a little less deluded in 2012.

Obama, black nationalism, jihad, and the MSM

Previously, TakeYourCross has covered black barbarism and anti-Americanism, media coverage of black anti-white violence, and Barack Hussein Obama’s communism.

Michelle Malkin wrote in You can’t say thug thizzle — that’s RAAACIST!:

I’ve mentioned Palestra.net reporter Shelby Holliday’s excellent work interviewing the Homeless People for Obama riff-raff in Ohio on this blog and in my column. (See here and here.)

Wouldn’t you know it: I am now being accused of RAAAAAACISM for repeating the phrase one of those homeless people used in his endorsement of Obama.

That’s right. I can’t say “thug thizzle” and explain its street meaning.

Because it’s a, you know, “racially-tinged” remark unless it’s uttered by vagabonds and rappers.

A HuffPo huffer accuses me of race-baiting here.

Why is that a surprise? Through the Obama thugs’ tactics, it has not been reported in the MSM that Michelle Obama is a self-described ”black separationist“:

“There was no doubt in my mind that as a member of the black community, I am obligated to this community and will utilize all of my present and future resources to benefit the black community first and foremost.” - Michelle Obama. [...] (You can view Michelle Obama’s entire thesis paper at politico.com.)

Furthermore, it has not been widely reported that Barack Obama worked as an “activist” for a jihadist organization (Hat Tip: Council of Conservative Citizens):

Pro-PLO advocate held Obama fundraiser, describes Obama as ’sympathetic’
 
AAAN co-founder Rashid Khalidi was reportedly a director of the official PLO press agency WAFA in Beirut from 1976 to 1982, while the PLO committed scores of anti-Western attacks and was labeled by the U.S. as a terror group. Khalidi’s wife, AAAN President Mona Khalidi, was reportedly WAFA’s English translator during that period.
 
Rashid Khalidi at times has denied working directly for the PLO but Palestinian diplomatic sources in Ramallah told WND he indeed worked on behalf of WAFA. Khalidi also advised the Palestinian delegation to the Madrid Conference in 1991.
 
During documented speeches and public events, Khalidi has called Israel an “apartheid system in creation” and a destructive “racist” state.  
 
He has multiple times expressed support for Palestinian terror, calling suicide bombings response to “Israeli aggression.” He dedicated his 1986 book, “Under Siege,” to “those who gave their lives … in defense of the cause of Palestine and independence of Lebanon.” Critics assailed the book as excusing Palestinian terrorism.
 
While the Woods Fund’s contribution to Khalidi’s AAAN might be perceived as a one-time run in with Obama, the presidential hopeful and Khalidi evidence a deeper relationship.
 
According to a professor at the University of Chicago who said he has known Obama for 12 years, the Democratic presidential hopeful first befriended Khalidi when the two worked together at the university. The professor spoke on condition of anonymity. Khalidi lectured at the University of Chicago until 2003 while Obama taught law there from 1993 until his election to the Senate in 2004.
 
Khalidi in 2000 held what was described as a successful fundraiser for Obama’s failed bid for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, a fact not denied by Khalidi.
 
Speaking in a joint interview with WND and the John Batchelor Show of New York’s WABC Radio and Los Angeles’ KFI Radio, Khalidi was asked about his 2000 fundraiser for Obama.
 
“I was just doing my duties as a Chicago resident to help my local politician,” Khalidi stated.
 
Khalidi said he supports Obama for president “because he is the only candidate who has expressed sympathy for the Palestinian cause.”
 
Khalidi also lauded Obama for “saying he supports talks with Iran. If the U.S. can talk with the Soviet Union during the Cold War, there is no reason it can’t talk with the Iranians.”
 
Asked about Obama’s role funding the AAAN, Khalidi claimed he had “never heard of the Woods Fund until it popped up on a bunch of blogs a few months ago.”   
 
He terminated the call when petitioned further about his links with Obama.  
 
Contacted by phone, Mona Khalidi refused to answer WND’s questions about the AAAN’s involvement with Obama.
 
Obama’s campaign headquarters did not reply to a list of WND questions sent by e-mail to the senator’s press office.

Nor has it been widely reported that one of his white female campaigners was murdered in a black ghetto where she was sent by his campaign:

EXPECT THIS STORY TO BE 100% CENSORED, COVERED UP, AND BLACKED OUT BY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.

[...]

A 25 year old white female Obama campaigner was riding her bicycle in a virtually all black neighborhood of New Orleans. She was on a “cross country trek” to support Obama. So brainwashed by multi-cultural propaganda that this “community activist” thought nothing about venturing around a black NOLA neighborhood after dark. She was SHOT IN THE HEAD, and he body was left lying on the sidewalk.

Apparently it didn’t matter that she had come all the way from San Fransisco to campaign for Obama. She was just another white victim to the local residents. Local residents left her body lie on the sidewalk and didn’t even notify police. Her body sat for hours until it was seen by a construction crew that was there to gut houses damaged by Katrina.

Take a minute to imagine what would happen if a black woman campaigning for Obama had been found shot in the head in a white neighborhood. THIS WOULD THE LARGEST NEWS STORY IN THE WORLD!

Update: The San Fransisco Chronicle has posted a shameless and transparently disingenuous “tribute” to the murdered girl. Even though the New Orleans police have explicitly stated “robbery does not appear to be the motive,” the San Fransisco Chronicle used the headline “activist slain in New Orleans robbery.” Then it has the audacity to say she was “on vacation” in New Orleans! Who takes a vacation in a Hurricane ravaged all-black ghetto with possibly the highest murder rate in the Western Hemisphere?

The whole story is an obvious attempt by the paper to cover up what really happened. The Chronicle makes no mention that she was campaigning for Obama, even though her friends all say she was. The paper does however praise her for her far-left activism, including protesting the 2008 Republican National Convention. Finally the paper refers to the area in which she was killed as a “tough” section. No mention that it is about 95%+ black. The tribute is written by left-wing staff writer Steve Rubenstein and is not a factual news item, but a deliberate attempt to downplay and cover up the true nature of the murder. Imagine if a black Obama supporter was murdered in a white neighborhood. Rubenstein would be screaming for blood on the pages of the Chronicle.

Update: At least two dozen left-wing websites, many based in San Fransisco, have posted online tributes to Kirsten. I have yet to find one that states the obvious, or attempts to learn any lesson from this. One site compares her to another female left-wing activist who recently traveled to Southern Mexico to express “solidarity” with the Indian rebels. The Indians raped and murdered her and abandoned her body in a deserted cabin. Click Here.

I could go on and on about this. Numerous high-profile “anti-Apartheid activists,” most of them female, have been murdered by the Negros they thought they were helping in South Africa. At least one was from the United States. During the Cincinnati race riots, four white male members of a local Marxist groups tried to join the blacks rioters. One of them is seen in news footage which we have posted on CofCC.org in the past. The leader of their group sent them e-mails telling them to join in and try to get on the news. That way no one could say it was “all black.” Later that night the four were beaten senseless and hospitalized by their new black comrades.

Despite the most brutal efforts of social engineers, “racial integration” has not happened. “Anti-racism” is a euphemism for anti-white bigotry imposed in America by radical elites (often Jewish or mainline Protestant).

D.C. socialists versus technology

Michelle Malkin wrote in Obama, the Socialist New Party, and the socialist Bush Treasury Department:

There’s a lot of blog buzz over Barack Obama’s membership in the socialist New Party. You can read about it here, here, and here.

A year ago, I might have gotten as worked up about this as everyone else seems to be.

But after watching a GOP White House and Republican collaborationists fork over billions upon billions in socialist aid to private businesses, presiding over the most massive nationalization efforts I’ve seen in my lifetime over the past year — and then watching John McCain pitch his Treasury Department-as-national loan servicer plan during the debate — it’s hard for me to muster up much more angst than I already have.

[...]

Socialism is here and now.

[...]

In a less virulent form, it already has been; the private sector has been subordinated to governmental power (often via abuse of the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution).

Garet Garrett wrote of the New Deal, which made great use of the Commerce Clause, in The Revolution Was:

So it was that a revolution took place within the form. Like the hagfish, the New Deal entered the old form and devoured its meaning from within. The revolutionaries were inside; the defenders were outside. A government that had been supported by the people and so controlled by the people became one that supported the people and so controlled them. Much of it is irreversible. That is true because habits of dependence are much easier to form than to break. Once the government, on ground of public policy, has assumed the responsibility to provide people with buying power when they are in want of it, or when they are unable to provide themselves with enough of it, according to a minimum proclaimed by government, it will never be the same again.

In High Finance and Bolshevik Principles, Jeff Nyquist explained why this would happen:

It was Joshua Rosner, writing in the Financial Times on Tuesday, who said it best. “In a capitalist economy, losers are expected to take losses and winners to gain.” But that’s not the way it works today, is it? More than three Decades ago, Richard Nixon famously said: “We’re all Keynesians now.” In 2008 we can go further. If George Bush had Nixon’s grasp of affairs, he would be forced to admit: “We’ve all become socialists, despite our lip service to the free market.”  

Rosner says we have begun to nationalize bad assets. From there it is a small step to the nationalization of good assets. In fact, the two things logically entail one another. As Rosner asserts, we have officially lost faith in the market. We have lost faith in the source of our prosperity. We no longer abide the creative destruction of the market process. We do not want the suffering that naturally attends real growth. Good things and only good things are demanded. Losses are unacceptable, even though these always attend genuine achievement. Everybody has to be a winner. In today’s school system we find no child left behind, which exemplifies the ongoing catastrophe in American education.

The logic of late capitalism (the declining form of capitalism) calls for the elimination of all suffering (and therefore, the elimination of real growth). This program is the basis of latter-day social democracy, which opposes the market because pain and tragedy are normal to the market system. Social democracy wants a world without failing corporations or banks. It is no wonder, then, that step-by-step they have ringed the market with “protections.” Today’s social democrat (and compassionate conservative) wants the benefits of the market without the pain of market process. The Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises once wrote: “Men must choose between the market economy and socialism. They cannot evade deciding between these alternatives….” No pain, no gain.

So there you have it. A decision has been made (and nearly everyone agrees), that pain must be nationalized. Ergo, bad assets must be nationalized because bad assets involve pain. Someone somewhere figured out that nationalizing a thing makes it go away. Take, for example, health care. You nationalize health care and it’s gone. You nationalize any industry and it withers away. Apply this redistributionist principle to all human suffering and, well, you have socialism.

[...]

If anyone thought U.S. Treasury bonds are a riskless investment, think again. Am I suggesting the U.S. government will default on its obligations? In my opinion, no other outcome is imaginable. If you doubt this conclusion, try to imagine federal, state and local government paying off $10 trillion. It’s not going to happen, as the readiest method of default open to government is the debasement of the national currency. This means an end to American international power – financial and military. It means an end to the old international order, which has existed since 1945. It means global revolution. Wave hello to socialism.

While socialists are gaining, technology is outpacing them, writes Michael Malone in The End of an Era:

From where I sit, the United States government has embarked on two pieces of social engineering in the last few years. One was to make oil expensive as expensive as possible to drive people to greater use of alternative energy sources - because anything less would be irresponsible and destructive to the environment. The other was to enshrine home ownership (i.e., easy-to-obtain mortgages) as a new American right - because anything less would be unequal and racist.

None of us voted on these decisions - indeed, neither was even spoken about directly, much less debated. But nevertheless, both became national policy… and both have sparked national, now international, crises. Then, once they became crises, both were blamed on ‘greedy capitalism’, instead of what they really were: legislative interference into market forces.

[...]

It is impossible not to look upon all of this as a kind of a vast, predictable pantomime. The same people who created the mess are honored for (sorta) getting us out of it, a few scapegoats go to jail, the real perpetrators not only escape punishment but are often rewarded, a bunch of regular people get screwed (lose their jobs, go bankrupt) and a whole lot more end up paying the bill for two million failed mortgages that never should have been granted in the first place.

The American people know this, which is why:

1) They aren’t taking this current crisis as seriously as pundits say they should - after all, if our elected officials can play politics against their enemies, and take the time to lard the bailout bill with pork, why should they? And,

2) They have nominated for President two candidates who - ostensibly — represent ‘Maverick’ attitudes and ‘Change’.

To my mind, what makes this economic crisis different from ones in even the recent past is that it has exposed the fact that there are, apparently, no real leaders left in Washington - that the intellectual capital in the National Capitol has fallen to a new low - if that’s possible. Most of all, it shows that we can no longer look to D.C. for leadership into the rest of the 21st century.

Marxists and statists of all stripes are, as one might expect, rubbing their hands in glee and declaring this the final death crisis of Capitalism. But I think just the opposite is occurring. What we are in fact seeing are the final death throes of governmental social engineering. As I noted two weeks ago, we are in a kind of Mentos-in-coke world right now - where, thanks to tech, the sheer speed of transactions and the enormous breadth of response, almost any outside influence can quickly turn the whole economy (or culture) into an explosive brew.

As it happens, out here in Silicon Valley, we have been conducting our own social engineering experiments. Three, in fact, have been at least as sweeping as Freddie Mac’s changing of mortgage eligibility rules. One of them has been to wire the entire world in a huge, high-speed global information grid (the Internet). Another has been to restructure the entire entertainment industry and its pricing model (the iPod). And the third has been to empower the citizenry to form groups based upon common interests rather than the limitations of physical proximity (Web 2.0 - social networks).

Here’s the thing. All three of these multi-billion dollar projects have been pay-as-you-go, driven largely by individuals and companies that assume their own risk, they have instantly rewarded smart decisions and punished bad ones, they are tested every millisecond against human nature (i.e., the marketplace), they are biased towards efficiency over seniority, and most of all, they are voluntary.

And they are all succeeding.

We will get out this current financial mess - not by government fiat, but because entrepreneurs and smart corporate executives and hard-working everyday people will innovate us out of it. They will come up with the new financial instruments that restructure this debt, the new technologies that will generate the wealth to make up for this loss (as they did after 9/11) and ultimately create more jobs than are right now being lost.

And if Washington really wanted to help Americans (and there is no indication right now that it does) it would, the instant it passes the bail-out bill, get to work not adding more regulations in response to this crisis, but stripping away the destructive ones we created after the last big one. And a good place to start would be Sarbanes-Oxley, which brilliantly keeps wealth out of the hands of regular workers (by keeping start-up companies from going public), all while costing, by my reckoning, $200 billion over the last six years.

If the last two weeks have taught us anything, it is that Washington is not going to get fixed, no matter who is elected. The world is moving on. Seven hundred thousand people are joining, via the Web, the Global Economy each day. If the prognosticators are right, we are now only 1000 days or so from crucial turning points in the world economy (the next billion consumers, universal wireless broadband, nanotech, thinking machines, etc.)

A new era - with new rules, new winners and new losers — is coming up on us fast, and we need to get ready for it right now. Our national leaders just had their chance to prove they were prepared for this new era - and they have failed miserably. We now have to look elsewhere for leadership… and quickly.

Not surprisingly, 74% pf CEO’s fear an Obama presidency would be “disastrous” for the country.

Russia buys Iceland, Britain

Previously, TakeYourCross has covered the Russian threat to Britain. It has also covered the Russian infiltration of Iceland and its connection to the Russian threat to Britain.

From MSNBC:

REYKJAVIK, Iceland - Iceland nationalized its second-largest bank Tuesday under emergency legislation and said it had negotiated a 4 billion-euro ($5.4 billion) loan from Russia to shore up the nation’s finances amid a full-blown financial crisis.

A Russian official, however, said a loan had not been agreed upon.

The bailout of Landsbanki came a day after trading in shares of major banks was suspended, the Icelandic krona lost a quarter of its value against the euro and the government rushed through emergency legislation giving it sweeping powers to deal with the financial meltdown.

“As declared by the government, all domestic deposits are fully guaranteed,” the Financial Supervisory Authority said. “Landsbanki’s domestic branches, call centers, cash machines (ATMs) and Internet operations will be open for business as usual.”

Within hours of the government move, the Samson holding company, which held a 41 percent stake in Landsbanki, went to the district court seeking temporary protection from its creditors.

Iceland’s central bank said in a statement that it had been informed by the Russian ambassador, Victor I. Tatarintsev, that Iceland would be given a loan of 4 billion euros ($5.4 billion), and that this had been confirmed by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

[...]

A collapse of the Icelandic financial system could reverberate across Europe, given the heavy investment by Icelandic banks and companies across the continent.

One of the country’s biggest companies, retailing investment group Baugur, owns or has stakes in dozens of major European retailers — including enough to make it the largest private company in Britain, where it owns a handful of well-known stores such as the famous toy store Hamley’s.

Perhaps Alexander Dugin should have added Moscow-Reykjavik to his list of Eurasian axes. The Icelanders are a mix of serf and Viking aristocrat — similar to Russians, and they are a virulently secular people with a state church (Lutheran) and a multiculturalist elite — similar to Russians. Icelanders and Russians share  substantial anti-American/Communist/Green segments, the love of money-laundering, and socialism. Meanwhile, America has shut its Keflavik base over Iceland’s objections, leaving Iceland defenseless in the face of increased Russian aggression. What could be better?

The Moscow-Berlin Axis is alive and well

“The task of Moscow is to tear Europe away from the control of the U.S. (NATO), to assist European unification, and to strengthen ties with Central Europe under the aegis of the fundamental external axis Moscow-Berlin. Eurasia needs a united, friendly Europe.” 

 

“The maximum task [for the future],” he underscores, “is the ‘Finlandization’ of all of Europe.”

“In Germany and France, there is a firm anti-Atlanticist tradition.”

– Alexander Dugin, writing in his 1999 textbook The Foundations of Geopolitics

 

From The Wall Street Journal (Hat Tip: The 8th Circle)

 

 

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization won’t give Georgia and Ukraine a road map to membership at a meeting later this year, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Thursday.Meanwhile, Kiev took a step away from the West and closer to Moscow, as Ukraine’s Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko announced gas deals with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and voiced support for Russian accession to the World Trade Organization.Mrs. Merkel’s rejection of a NATO track for Georgia and Ukraine, at a news conference with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in St. Petersburg, would effectively act as a veto. The Western military alliance operates by consensus.U.S. officials had hoped a NATO ministerial meeting set for December might be the occasion for the alliance to extend a so-called Membership Action Plan, or MAP, to the two ex-Soviet States. However, any quick move toward their NATO membership grew less likely after Georgia’s five-day war with Russia in August.The U.S. State Department declined to comment, saying it hadn’t seen or heard Mrs. Merkel’s remarks.Russia opposes NATO expansion to include more countries of the ex-Soviet Union beyond the three Baltic states that joined the U.S.-led alliance in 2004. Russian leaders have claimed Georgia’s NATO aspirations encouraged it to take military action that triggered the August invasion. Georgia and Western nations have called Russia the aggressor.Georgian Integration Minister Temuri Yakobashvili said it would have been better for Mrs. Merkel to wait to make her decision in December, and base it on NATO’s reports on Georgia’s progress toward meeting the alliance’s criteria for MAP. “This is becoming a highly politicized, rather than a technical, performance-based decision,” he said.

From Reuters:

The European Union and Ukraine can do a lot to deepen their existing ties before looking at the country’s possible membership of [sic] the bloc, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said on Monday.

“We have lots to do to reinforce ties with Ukraine without possible accession,” Sarkozy told a news conference after an emergency EU summit on the Georgia conflict. (Reporting by Mark John, editing by William Schomberg)

Clearly, the Finlandization of the EUSSR is significantly under way. The Moscow-Berlin Axis is alive and well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GOP purges “hateful” white official, courts Hispanic supremacists

From WPTV comes a video about the Florida GOP seeking to purge one of its elected white officials, Derek Black, because it finds him to be “hateful” [sic], i.e. a bigot. 

The GOP energetically courts Hispanic supremacists. Regarding Derek Black, the local GOP’s chief, Sid Dinerstein, explains that “we’re not that tolerant”.

Geert Wilders: Dutch hero

Geert Wilders is a remarkable Dutch patriot. After his anti-jihadist film, Fitna, brought government censorship and jihadist threats in Holland, he is planning to make a sequel. He traveled to New York recently, and spoke to the Hudson Institute, as well as being interviewed by Glenn Beck, and by Pamela Geller. Transcripts of his Pamela Geller interview and his Hudson Institute speech are below.

From the Party of Freedom (Netherlands) (Hat Tip: American Renaissance): 

Geert Wilders Speaks to the Hudson Institute in New York, September 25, 2008:

Dear friends,

Thank you very much for inviting me. Great to be at the Four Seasons. I come from a country that has one season only: a rainy season that starts January 1st and ends December 31st. When we have three sunny days in a row, the government declares a national emergency. So Four Seasons, that’s new to me.

It’s great to be in New York. When I see the skyscrapers and office buildings, I think of what Ayn Rand said: “The sky over New York and the will of man made visible.” Of course. Without the Dutch you would have been nowhere, still figuring out how to buy this island from the Indians. But we are glad we did it for you. And, frankly, you did a far better job than we possibly could have done.

I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the old world. There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe. This not only is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West. The danger I see looming is the scenario of America as the last man standing. The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe. In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: who lost Europe? Patriots from around Europe risk their lives every day to prevent precisely this scenario form becoming a reality.

My short lecture consists of 4 parts.

First I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe. Then, I will say a few things about Islam. Thirdly, if you are still here, I will talk a little bit about the movie you just saw. To close I will tell you about a meeting in Jerusalem.

The Europe you know is changing. You have probably seen the landmarks. The Eiffel Tower and Trafalgar Square and Rome’s ancient buildings and maybe the canals of Amsterdam. They are still there. And they still look very much the same as they did a hundred years ago.

But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world, a world very few visitors see – and one that does not appear in your tourist guidebook. It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration. All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighbourhoods where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen. And if they are, they might regret it. This goes for the police as well. It’s the world of head scarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corner. The shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find any economic activity. These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious fanatics. These are Muslim neighbourhoods, and they are mushrooming in every city across Europe. These are the building-blocks for territorial control of increasingly larger portions of Europe, street by street, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, city by city.

There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe. With larger congregations than there are in churches. And in every European city there are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region. Clearly, the signal is: we rule.

Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam, Marseille and Malmo in Sweden. In many cities the majority of the under-18 population is Muslim. Paris is now surrounded by a ring of Muslim neighbourhoods. Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many cities. In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned, because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult to Muslims. Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils.  In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by Muslims. Non-Muslim women routinely hear “whore, whore”. Satellite dishes are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in the country of origin.  In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of Darwin. The history of the Holocaust can in many cases no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity.  In England sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal system. Many neighbourhoods in France are no-go areas for women without head scarves.  Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in Brussels, because he was drinking during the Ramadan. Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run for the worst wave of anti-Semitism since World War II. French is now commonly spoken on the streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya, Israel. I could go on forever with stories like this. Stories about Islamization.

A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live in Europe. San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.

Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate. But there are few signs of that. The Pew Research Center reported that half of French Muslims see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France. One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks. The British Centre for Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in favour of a worldwide caliphate. A Dutch study reported that half of Dutch Muslims admit they “understand” the 9/11 attacks.

Muslims demand what they call ‘respect’. And this is how we give them respect. Our elites are willing to give in. To give up. In my own country we have gone from calls by one cabinet member to turn Muslim holidays into official state holidays, to statements by another cabinet member, that Islam is part of Dutch culture, to an affirmation by the Christian-Democratic attorney general that he is willing to accept sharia in the Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority. We have cabinet members with passports from Morocco and Turkey.

Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behaviour, ranging from petty crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus drivers, to small-scale riots. Paris has seen its uprising in the low-income suburbs, the banlieus. Some prefer to see these as isolated incidents, but I call it a Muslim intifada. I call the perpetrators “settlers”. Because that is what they are. They do not come to integrate into our societies, they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam. Therefore, they are settlers.

Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighbourhoods, their cities, their countries.

Politicians shy away from taking a stand against this creeping sharia. They believe in the equality of all cultures. Moreover, on a mundane level, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be ignored.

Our many problems with Islam cannot be explained by poverty, repression or the European colonial past, as the Left claims. Nor does it have anything to do with Palestinians or American troops in Iraq. The problem is Islam itself.

Allow me to give you a brief Islam 101. The first thing you need to know about Islam is the importance of the book of the Quran. The Quran is Allah’s personal word, revealed by an angel to Mohammed, the prophet. This is where the trouble starts. Every word in the Quran is Allah’s word and therefore not open to discussion or interpretation. It is valid for every Muslim and for all times. Therefore, there is no such a thing as moderate Islam. Sure, there are a lot of moderate Muslims. But a moderate Islam is non-existent.

The Quran calls for hatred, violence, submission, murder, and terrorism. The Quran calls for Muslims to kill non-Muslims, to terrorize non-Muslims and to fulfil their duty to wage war: violent jihad. Jihad is a duty for every Muslim, Islam is to rule the world – by the sword. The  Quran is clearly anti-Semitic, describing Jews as monkeys and pigs.

The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet. His behaviour is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized. Now, if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem. But Mohammed was a warlord, a mass murderer, a pedophile, and had several marriages – at the same time. Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. He advised on matters of slavery, but never advised to liberate slaves. Islam has no other morality than the advancement of Islam. If it is good for Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad. There is no gray area or other side.

Quran as Allah’s own word and Mohammed as the perfect man are the two most important facets of Islam. Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion. Sure, it has a god, and a here-after, and 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam means ‘submission’. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is sharia. If you want to compare Islam to anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all totalitarian ideologies. 

This is what you need to know about Islam, in order to understand what is going on in Europe. For millions of Muslims the Quran and the live of Mohammed are not 14 centuries old, but are an everyday reality, an ideal, that guide every aspect of their lives. Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam “the most retrograde force in the world”, and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Quran.

Which brings me to my movie, Fitna.

I am a lawmaker, and not a movie maker. But I felt I had the moral duty to educate about Islam. The duty to make clear that the Quran stands at the heart of what some people call terrorism but is in reality jihad. I wanted to show that the problems of Islam are at the core of Islam, and do not belong to its fringes.

Now, from the day the plan for my movie was made public, it caused quite a stir, in the Netherlands and throughout Europe. First, there was a political storm, with government leaders, across the continent in sheer panic. The Netherlands was put under a heightened terror alert, because of possible attacks or a revolt by our Muslim population. The Dutch branch of the Islamic organisation Hizb ut-Tahrir declared that the Netherlands was due for an attack. Internationally, there was a series of incidents. The Taliban threatened to organize additional attacks against Dutch troops in Afghanistan, and a website linked to Al Qaeda published the message that I ought to be killed, while various muftis in the Middle East stated that I would be responsible for all the bloodshed after the screening of the movie. In Afghanistan and Pakistan the Dutch flag was burned on several occasions. Dolls representing me were also burned. The Indonesian President announced that I will never be admitted into Indonesia again, while the UN Secretary General and the European Union issued cowardly statements in the same vein as those made by the Dutch Government. I could go on and on. It was an absolute disgrace, a sell-out.

A plethora of legal troubles also followed, and have not ended yet. Currently the state of Jordan is litigating against me. Only last week there were renewed security agency reports about a heightened terror alert for the Netherlands because of Fitna.

Now, I would like to say a few things about Israel. Because, very soon, we will get together in its capitol. The best way for a politician in Europe to loose votes is to say something positive about Israel. The public has wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the aggressor. I, however, will continue to speak up for Israel. I see defending Israel as a matter of principle. I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times. I support Israel. First, because it is the Jewish homeland after two thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz, second because it is a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defense.

Samuel Huntington writes it so aptly: “Islam has bloody borders”. Israel is located precisely on that border. This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating Islam’s territorial advance. Israel is facing the front lines of jihad, like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines, Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan, Lebanon, and Aceh in Indonesia. Israel is simply in the way. The same way West-Berlin was during the Cold War.

The war against Israel is not a war against Israel. It is a war against the West. It is jihad. Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant for all of us. If there would have been no Israel, Islamic imperialism would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for conquest. Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream, unaware of the dangers looming.

Many in Europe argue in favor of abandoning Israel in order to address the grievances of our Muslim minorities. But if Israel were, God forbid, to go down, it would not bring any solace to the West. It would not mean our Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behavior, and accept our values. On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous encouragement to the forces of Islam. They would, and rightly so, see the demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed. The end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the beginning. It would mean the start of the final battle for world domination. If they can get Israel, they can get everything. Therefore, it is not that the West has a stake in Israel. It is Israel.

It is very difficult to be an optimist in the face of the growing Islamization of Europe. All the tides are against us. On all fronts we are losing. Demographically the momentum is with Islam. Muslim immigration is even a source of pride within ruling liberal parties. Academia, the arts, the media, trade unions, the churches, the business world, the entire political establishment have all converted to the suicidal theory of multiculturalism. So-called journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a ‘right-wing extremists’ or ‘racists’. The entire establishment has sided with our enemy. Leftists, liberals and Christian-Democrats are now all in bed with Islam.

This is the most painful thing to see: the betrayal by our elites. At this moment in Europe’s history, our elites are supposed to lead us. To stand up for centuries of civilization. To defend our heritage.  To honour our eternal Judeo-Christian values that made Europe what it is today. But there are very few signs of hope to be seen at the governmental level. Sarkozy, Merkel, Brown, Berlusconi; in private, they probably know how grave the situation is. But when the little red light goes on, they stare into the camera and tell us that Islam is a religion of peace, and we should all try to get along nicely and sing Kumbaya. They willingly participate in, what President Reagan so aptly called: “the betrayal of our past, the squandering of our freedom.”

If there is hope in Europe, it comes from the people, not from the elites. Change can only come from a grass-roots level. It has to come from the citizens themselves. Yet these patriots will have to take on the entire political, legal and media establishment.

Over the past years there have been some small, but encouraging, signs of a rebirth of the original European spirit. Maybe the elites turn their backs on freedom, the public does not. In my country, the Netherlands, 60 percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the number one policy mistake since World War II. And another 60 percent sees Islam as the biggest threat to our national identity. I don’t think the public opinion in Holland is very different from other European countries.

Patriotic parties that oppose jihad are growing, against all odds. My own party debuted two years ago, with five percent of the vote. Now it stands at ten percent in the polls. The same is true of all smililary-minded parties in Europe. They are fighting the liberal establishment, and are gaining footholds on the political arena, one voter at the time.

Now, for the first time, these patriotic parties will come together and exchange experiences. It may be the start of something big. Something that might change the map of Europe for decades to come. It might also be Europe’s last chance.

This December a conference will take place in Jerusalem. Thanks to Professor Aryeh Eldad, a member of Knesset, we will be able to watch Fitna in the Knesset building and discuss the jihad. We are organizing this event in Israel to emphasize the fact that we are all in the same boat together, and that Israel is part of our common heritage. Those attending will be a select audience. No racist organizations will be allowed. And we will only admit parties that are solidly democratic.

This conference will be the start of an Alliance of European patriots. This Alliance will serve as the backbone for all organizations and political parties that oppose jihad and Islamization. For this Alliance I seek your support.

This endeavor may be crucial to America and to the West. America may hold fast to the dream that, thanks tot its location, it is safe from jihad and shaira. But seven years ago to the day, there was still smoke rising from ground zero, following the attacks that forever shattered that dream. Yet there is a danger even greater danger than terrorist attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing. The lights may go out in Europe faster than you can imagine. An Islamic Europe means a Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual nightmare, and a loss of military might for America - as its allies will turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs. With an Islamic Europe, it would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome, Athens and Jerusalem.

Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives. All throughout Europe American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe’s children in the same state in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so.

This is not the first time our civilization is under threat. We have seen dangers before. We have been betrayed by our elites before. They have sided with our enemies before. And yet,  then, freedom prevailed.

These are not times in which to take lessons from appeasement, capitulation, giving away,  giving up or giving in. These are not times in which to draw lessons from Mr. Chamberlain. These are times calling us to draw lessons from Mr. Churchill and the words he spoke in 1942:

“Never give in, never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy”. 

 

 

 

 

 

See the Geert Wilders interview whose transcription follows, at Atlas Shrugs:

Pamela Geller: Hello Atlas lover, mama has a big one for you today. I am here at an undisclosed location in New York City with Geert Wilders. Hero, legend, freedom fighter, he is a member of parliament of his own party …the Freedom Party?

G.W: Yes

 Atlas continues: In the Netherlands. And I want to discuss with him the current status of the increasing Islamization of Europe. Now you came to America, what’s your objective?

G.Wilders: Well my objective is to speak to the American audience and to warn them that, Europe, they are losing Europe, if they have not already lost Europe, to the terrible process of Islamization of our continent. And my point today will be that America might be the last man standing alone in the fight for the preservation of our culture, and the fight against, once again Islamization of our Western society. That indeed, when you talk about what’s happening in Europe today with the influx of Islam, the culture that’s indeed like, I believe, is not a culture but a token ideology of retarded-ness, backwardness, and wants only one thing, and that is not to assimilate in our societies, but to submit and everything that we stand for.

And at the end of the day, Europe will lose its freedom, will lose its democracy, and will lose everything that we stand for. And unfortunately the political elite in the Netherlands and in Europe, all throughout Europe, they look in the other direction. They are very political correct, and they are in favour of the biggest disease that we have today in Europe, which is called “multiculturalism”, (unclear2:01-2:06) which they are not, and we see it in the streets of our cities in Europe every day, that the violence, that everything that is happening to our societies is going eh, for the worst. Let me tell you, that we have today in Europe 54 million Muslims, and my point is not so much against the Muslims, but against the ideology.

And I believe that even though there might be moderate Muslims, but that a moderate Islam is nonexistent and that they should not treat Islam like another leaf on a tree. That there is one leaf called Christianity, one leaf that is called Judaism, that Islam indeed, is something that wants to kill the tree and everything that we stand for. And that Islam indeed, as an ideology, can only be compared to ideologies like Communism, like Fascism, like National Socialism, and really, if we don’t wake up very soon, not only will Europe be lost, but America, indeed, will stand alone in the fight against, eh, the preservation of our common heritage, that is everything that Islam is not.

Atlas: This is what Martin Styn had (unclear3:11-3:17) in America Alone”. But America has problems of her own. In your opinion, ‘looking over the pond’ so to speak, toward our increasing Islamifaction of America, so you see what’s happening with the footbaths in the airports and in the schools, (Wilders: yes) also the Saudis buying the textbook companies so the children already have three chapters, two on Islam, one on the prophet Mohamed.

It’s all very small, all very (unclear 3:44), but at the same time, the State Department is bringing in, they’re importing whole Muslim communities from Somalia. And now what is happening, right now, there have been violent protests, recently, because they want their prayer time. Now the other workers said: “why should we have to suffer, that’s not fair”, (so it comes head to head, and they have been fighting 4:05). And I think that this is just the beginning, because again, this is a technique to get people to back down.

G.Wilders: Exactly. I fully subscribe to what you said. Everything that you just mentioned also happened in Europe some years ago. And indeed I remember when I arrived at Washington airport yesterday, there was just before the customs, there was a big sign which said “Welcome to the United States” and I don’t know if you’ve ever seen it, and there were three headscarfed Muslim women on it and a big mosque in the background. Those were the first things I saw when I arrived at Washington airport. And I thought well, what is happening here?

And of course, when you see what you just described, and I think that also here in the United States people should get some kind of awareness, some kind of a sense of urgency that the society is changing, and that multiculturalism and political correctness, to give in every time, means that at the end of the day, will be many yards or many meters as we say in Europe, and you will lose your country as well.

So what I hope, not only for European politicians but also for the American politicians, especially for the American public, be aware more that we are not dealing with just some, something, some other religion, we are dealing in the United States, in the Netherlands, the more we give in the more we compromise, the more appease to them, it’s not seen as a token of strength, it’s seen as a token of weakness.

Atlas: It’s surrender.

G.Wilders: It’s surrender, it’s weakness and they will never stop, ever until they submit all of us. It sounds to some people a little bit extreme, a little bit over the top, but believe me it’s not. If you look at the cities, the major cities in the Netherlands, half of the people under the age of eighteen in the Netherlands, in cities like Amsterdam, like Rotterdam are already (unclear6:09) from different origins, and this today is now happening in the United States, and if not today then it’ll be tomorrow or the day after.

And when it comes to the rights of women, when it comes to the rights of homosexuals, when it comes to the freedom of speech, when it comes to everything that we cherish, it will all vanish sooner or later. And I wish that there were more politicians, mostly in the United States, of course you have some, we met a congresswoman last night, and day after tomorrow I will meet Senator Tancredo, who also has some good initiatives. But the majority of the politicians unfortunately is looking only at the short term, and on the re-election on the short term, whereas the long run, and this long run is not something about decades, but years. Like I said, it’s a process that (unclear 6:59) the sooner the better, and to speak out means that you take a risk like yourself, and a lot of hassle  for the things you’ve said, and you’re a very courageous woman to do that.

Atlas: winks

G.Wilders continues: But it’s the only way, it’s the only way, to speak out and say lets stop immigration, let’s stop Islamization, be more proud, there is nothing wrong with that. People (thrive on our identity, on our culture, on our freedom of speech. And the more Islam comes to the United States, the more Islam comes to Europe the more it will kill everything we stand for. The Koran is not a holy book, the Koran is a Fascist book, and there is no other word for that. The so called, prophet Mohamed was not a nice man that people should follow, he was a murderer, he was a paedophile, if he were in the United States today he probably be executed for the things he did.

Those are the realities, those are strong words, but those are the realities and we should face it, and if we don’t, once again we will regret it. Maybe not you or me, but our children or our grand children will wake up one day in a totally different America. And this is something that I believe in that America and Europe will not want to see.

Atlas: Well the problem in America is that the media has been complicit, there is a power (unclear 8:12) deniability and they will discuss Islam. When there is an honour killing in America and the first half of the article describes the honour killing, and “she was not a good Muslim, she embarrassed the family”, and then in the second half the reporter is saying, “This is not an Islamic caricature, other tribes do this, and this has nothing to do with Islam”.

So people are confused, because the information that they’re getting is dishonest, it’s a lie and everybody is saying the same thing. Now Senator Tancredo came up with a Jihad Prevention Act, (looking at the paper) and yes it’s called the Jihad Prevention Act, and he wants to bar entry of foreign nationals who advocate sharia, and in addition let’s make legislation that will make the advocacy of sharia by radical Muslims already in the United States a deportable offence.

G.Wilders: I think that it’s a very very great initiative by Senator Tancredo. I think I would of course subscribe to last proposal that you mentioned that if you advocate sharia you should be expelled. But I will personally propose in my Dutch parliament when it comes to the first proposal, I think that we should be tougher, we should not only, not allow, for the time being Muslims who are in favour of sharia, but we have to put a stop to immigration from Muslim countries until we resolve our problem. Until we really stop thinking like (unclear 9:36) until we really identify who we are and start being proud of that. And before we have done that, we still have other things to do.

Break in interview.

Atlas: What is interesting with the UN and the (unclear 10:49) Islamic countries, is that they’ve instituted their own, eh, they’ve hijacked the issue of human rights which supersedes everything prior to that.

G.Wilders: Yes. In the Cairo declaration, I think it’s two articles, article two and the last article in the declaration says, that human beings have human rights but they are all bound to the boundaries of sharia. So what I’ve found, this is the point I make many times to our own Minster of Foreign Affairs in the Netherlands, how can we have any kind of serious relations with countries in the United Nations which are also bi and multilateral, that really are in favour or subscribe to this Cairo declaration to the sharia.

I mean, this is what you see happening today in Europe, you have a minister, an attorney General in the Netherlands who has said “if Holland would ever have a Muslim majority, I would subscribe to the fact that the sharia would become implemented”. We saw in the United Kingdom last week, that they are already are implementing sharia, I mean we already are losing very rapidly our culture and our societies, to a culture of backwardness and retarded-ness to, to…

Atlas: To barbarity.

G.Wilders: To barbarity, like Wafa Sultan said very wisely, “it’s not a clash of civilizations, it’s between one civilization and backwardness and retarded-ness” and this is what people should see. This is why I made my movie Fitna as well. Not with actors like my friend Ayaan Hirsi Ali made in the past which was a very impressive movie called Submission, a very good movie. But what I tried to do to is use verses, suras from the Koran, and use real images, no actors but real images to let people see what Islam stands for today.

And when people make an effort to make such a movie about Judaism, about Christianity, you would see it, and this shows that today, this terrible Fascist book the Koran, is still unfortunately inspiring millions of people, millions of  Muslims in the world, and an increasingly amount of radical Muslims to act against us. And once again, not to integrate into our societies but to submit us, to rule over us, and this is also why my friend professor Eldad supports me so much in this initiative when it comes to meeting in Israel, for law makers to come together, because the fight against Israel is a fight against the West.

They are taking the blows that are not only meant for Israel, but are meant for us. And like Eldad said, this is not a territorial conflict. If one day Israel would be governed, if the Muslims would have their say, it would not be the end of the conflict, it would be the beginning of the conflict and Europe would be next.

Atlas: It would be their first major victory.

G.Wilders: Yes. I wish, I sometimes wish we had, -of course I’m not a war kind of guy, I’m a normal, I hope responsible politician- sometimes I hoped that we had a conventional war, against Muslim countries. Unfortunately we have something far worse. We have, after you saw in Europe, twice in the last fifteen hundred years, that Muslims tried to invade our country. Once they were stopped in Barque, and once they were stopped in Vienna…

Atlas: Charles Martel

G.Wilders: Yes Charles Martel, and now exactly the same is happening, only without fighting, and we are letting them, we are inviting them by immigration by giving them everything they stand for, by appeasing them, by granting every wish they have. It’s the worse kind of war. But actually this is a war, but only we are helping them, we are all the Chamberlains of the twenty first century.

Atlas: Well there are thousands of them, thousands of Chamberlains, you’re in the UK now and they’re actually giving welfare payments to men with multiple wives. The more wives you can have the more money you can get. And when they have to go into a house to search for explosives, where there is some terrorist activity, and you have to bring dogs in, the bomb sniffing dogs, the dogs have to wear little booties, little booties because they’re unclean.

G.Wilders: Can you imagine that, happening today?

Atlas: No.

G.Wilders: I mean if I read it, you say oh right, in my country there are even worse things happening? I think that we are traitors to our own culture, to our own identity. We should act, not talk, not of peace but act. And like I said, there is only one solution, it’s this, stop the Islamization, stop the building of new mosques, close Islamic schools, where young girls and boys are growing up, and their heads are being filled with an ideology of hatred and submission. Stop the immigration, not only of people who agree with sharia. You know the culture of taqiyya…

Atlas: Yes.

G.Wilders: If the Muslim in the Netherlands or anywhere else in Europe says, because he knows that he has to say the right things, believe me, if the Muslim ideology will become more prominent, it doesn’t even have to dominant, it doesn’t have to be 51%, but if it becomes more prominent, and you see in countries where the Muslim population is 10,15,20,25%, taqiyya ,means that they will teach their children that at the end of the day, they will never choose for a society in the West, but they will choose for Islam. And this is happening today. And instead of our government and our politicians and the press core is fighting against it, and showing the public in an honest and transparent way what is happening, they are looking in the other direction, and people like you and me who stand up and are being labelled as racists and as idiots, and we are not.

Atlas: Nope, we are not.

G.Wilders: So the only thing we can do is fight, speak out, educate, make movies make web logs, do everything possible to show people the reality. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Communist jihad: African edition

   

Previously, TakeYourCross has covered Russian complicity in jihad. 

 

 

 

By Ralph Peters, on October 1, 2008:

SOMALI pirates got a shock last week: The ship they seized carried dozens of Russian-built tanks, along with a wealth of heavy weapons and ammo. It was more than they’d bargained for.  

 

 

 

 

As I write, the Faina sits at anchor off a notorious pirate port, its crew held captive by 30 or more Somalis. US Navy warships circle the vessel. Our helicopters buzz its deck.

[...]

Dispatched by Vladimir Putin to cover up his arms industry’s role in equipping rogue states, a Russian warship is underway to break the standoff. The pirates aren’t going to like dealing with the Russians.

[...] 

 

In Sudan, a Muslim Brotherhood government (Janjaweed) is entrenched, with Chinese and Russian military support.