Book Review: Robert Spencer’s “Religion of Peace”

The Fjordman Report

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

Robert Spencer: Religion of Peace?I informed Robert Spencer recently that I had read his latest book, Religion of Peace?: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn’t, and was preparing a review of it. He expressed some surprise over the fact that I liked it, pointing out a few earlier essays of mine indicating that I am somewhat critical of Christianity. I would describe my relationship with that religion as mildly critical, but for the most part positive. I am a non-religious person, but I appreciate the many good aspects of Christianity and think some of the criticism against it is unfair.

This book elegantly compares the attitudes of Muslims and Christians on a wide range of topics, from violence via anti-Semitism to the separation of religion and state. I had been writing about the history of science recently and took particular interest in the chapter on this subject. Spencer explores the important theological differences between Islam on one hand and Judaism and Christianity on the other hand regarding reason and natural law:

Muslims believe that Allah’s hand is unfettered — he can do anything. The Qur’an explicitly refutes the Judeo-Christian view of God as a God of reason when it says: ‘The Jews say: Allah’s hand is fettered. Their hands are fettered and they are accursed for saying so’ (5:64). In other words, it is heresy to say that God operates by certain natural laws that we can understand through reason. This argument was played out throughout Islamic history. Muslim theologians argued during the long controversy with the Mu’tazilite sect, which exalted human reason, that Allah was not bound to govern the universe according to consistent and observable laws. ‘He cannot be questioned concerning what He does’ (Qur’an 21:23). Accordingly, observations of the physical world had no value; there was no reason to expect that any pattern to its workings would be consistent, or even discernable. If Allah could not be counted on to be consistent, why waste time observing the order of things? It could change tomorrow.

Due to this notion of the absolute sovereignty of Allah, professor Stanley Jaki believes that “Relatively early in its history, therefore, science in the Islamic world was deprived of the philosophical foundation it needed in order to flourish.” Consequently, “the improvements brought by Muslim scientists to the Greek scientific corpus were never substantial.” Author Rodney Stark states that “Islamic scholars achieved significant progress only in terms of specific knowledge, such as certain aspects of astronomy and medicine, which did not require any general theoretical basis. And as time passed, even this sort of progress ceased.”

The twelfth-century Jewish philosopher Maimonides explained the fundamentally anti-rational Islamic cosmology in this way:

Human intellect does not perceive any reason why a body should be in a certain place instead of being in another. In the same manner they say that reason admits the possibility that an existing being should be larger or smaller than it really is, or that it should be different in form and position from what it really is; e.g., a man might have the height of a mountain, might have several heads, and fly in the air; or an elephant might be as small as an insect, or an insect as huge as an elephant. This method of admitting possibilities is applied to the whole Universe. Whenever they affirm that a thing belongs to this class of admitted possibilities, they say that it can have this form and that it is also possible that it be found differently, and that the one form is not more possible than the other; but they do not ask whether the reality confirms their assumption….[They say] fire causes heat, water causes cold, in accordance with a certain habit; but it is logically not impossible that a deviation from this habit should occur, namely, that fire should cause cold, move downward, and still be fire; that the water should cause heat, move upward, and still be water. On this foundation their whole [intellectual] fabric is constructed.

The great thirteenth-century Christian theologian Saint Thomas Aquinas was influenced by Maimonides in his quest to reconcile the Bible with Aristotle. Aquinas professed belief in a rational God which was very different from the Allah of Islam, and stated that “since the principles of certain sciences — of logic, geometry, and arithmetic, for instance — are derived exclusively from the formal principals of things, upon which their essence depends, it follows that God cannot make the contraries of these principles; He cannot make the genus not to be predictable of the species, nor lines drawn from a circle’s center to its circumference not to be equal, nor the three angles of a rectilinear triangle not to be equal to two right angles.”

Robert Spencer does not shy away from criticizing the Catholic Church when he deems this appropriate, but he also tries to balance out some of the myths that have become widely accepted in popular culture, for instance regarding the case against Galileo Galilei:

In fact, Jesuit astronomers were among Galileo’s earliest and most enthusiastic supporters. When Galileo first published supporting evidence for the Copernican heliocentric theory, Cardinal Maffeo Barberini sent him a letter of congratulations. When Galileo visited Rome in 1624, Cardinal Barberini had become Pope Urban VIII. The pope welcomed the scientist, gave him gifts, and assured him that the church would never declare heliocentrism heretical. In fact, the pope and other churchmen, according to historian Jerome Langford, ‘believed that Galileo might be right, but they had to wait for more proof.’

GalileoAccording to Spencer, “that was the ultimate source of Galileo’s conflict with the church: he was teaching as fact what still at that time had only the status of theory. When church officials asked Galileo in 1616 to teach heliocentrism as theory rather than as fact, he agreed; however, in 1632 he published a new work, Dialogue on the Great World Systems, in which he presented heliocentrism as fact again. That was why Galileo was put on trial for suspected heresy and placed under house arrest. Historian J. L. Heilbron notes that from the beginning the controversy was not understood the way it has been presented by many critics of the church since then. The condemnation of Galileo, says Heilbron, ‘had no general or theological significance. Gassendi, in 1642, observed that the decision of the cardinals [who condemned Galileo], though important for the faithful, did not amount to an article of faith; Ricciolo, in 1651, that heliocentrism was not a heresy; Mengeli, in 1675, that interpretations of scripture can only bind Catholics if agreed to at a general council; and Baldigiani, in 1678, that everyone knew all that.’”
– – – – – – – –
Galilei’s encounter with the Inquisition in the seventeenth century is frequently cited as an example of the repression of science by Christianity in general and the Catholic Church in particular. However, if Christianity had always been hostile to science, the scientific revolution would never have taken place in Europe. According to the scholar Toby E. Huff and his excellent book The Rise of Early Modern Science: Islam, China and the West, second edition, the situation was much worse in China. T’ai-tsu, the first emperor of the Ming dynasty (r. 1368-98), considered the students at the imperial academy to be too unruly and appointed his nephew as head of the institution. Later he issued a set of pronouncements. As Huff says:

In the third of these proclamations (ca. 1386) there was a ‘list of ‘bad’ metropolitan degree holders,’ that is, chin-shih or ‘doctorates,’ along with the names of some students. ‘He prescribed the death penalty for sixty-eight metropolitan degree holders and two students; penal servitude for seventy degree holders and twelve students.’ The author of this account in the Cambridge History of China adds that these lists ‘must have discouraged men of learning.’ Appended to the edict was a further reprimand. The emperor ‘would put to death any man of talent who refused to serve the government when summoned. As he put it, ‘To the edges of the land, all are the king’s subjects….Literati in the realm who do not serve the ruler are estranged from teaching [of Confucius]. To execute them and confiscate the property of their families is not excessive.’ The trial and punishment of Galileo (confinement to his villa overlooking Florence) is nothing compared to this.

All things considered, the Christian West probably enjoyed more free speech than virtually any other major civilization during this period, which is arguably the single most important reason why its scientific progress surpassed that of both China and the Islamic world.

Spencer devotes some space to the sins of the Inquisition: “The medieval Inquisition that began in the thirteenth century was not the inspiration for the Inquisition of myth, the ecclesiastical reign of terror that allegedly murdered millions of innocent people for the crime of not accepting Christianity. That honor belongs to the Spanish Inquisition, which was established in 1478 by the Catholic monarchs Ferdinand and Isabella with authorization from Pope Sixtus IV. But by 1482, Sixtus had received numerous threats of abuses, leading to his appointment of the infamous priest Tomas de Torquemada as grand inquisitor in 1483.”

The Inquisition wasn’t a proud chapter in Christian history, but it should be remembered that its number of victims has been wildly exaggerated, and pales in comparison to the evils of modern totalitarian movements:

Estimates of how many people Torquemada had put to death during his fifteen years as grand inquisitor range from 2,000 to 8,800. Torquemada was also a key supporter of the decree of Ferdinand and Isabella expelling the Jews from Spain in 1492. The Spanish Inquisition continued until the early nineteenth century, although it was greatly diminished in its latter years. Juan Antonio Llorente, an Inquisition official in the late eighteenth century and a historian of the Spanish Inquisition, estimated that in all slightly fewer than 32,000 people were executed. However, more recently several historians have found that number immensely exaggerated and suggest that the actual number is closer to 3,200. As this covers a period of several hundred years, even the high number hardly amounts to genocidal proportions or comes remotely close to the millions massacred by the rapacious inquisitors of myth. Ultimately, the precise number is unimportant because it is jarring that the church of Jesus Christ acceded to the execution of even one person. It is jarring because it manifests a spirit so completely at variance with what Christ taught and how he behaved.

However, killing those leaving the religion is not condoned in the Christian Gospels, but it is condoned in Islamic texts:

Abdul RahmanThe execution of heretics thus represents an aberration in the life of the church, at variance with the teachings of Christ and the early Christian thinkers. The contrast with Islamic apostasy law is sharp and unmistakable. While in the Islamic state as traditionally conceived, Jews and Christians have the right to practice their religion — with certain severe restrictions — the same relative generosity is not applied to Muslims who wish to leave Islam. Muhammad said, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him,’ and that remains normative for Islam. A modern manual of Islamic laws stipulates that ‘when a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostasizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.’ This principle isn’t easily susceptible to reform because it is founded on a statement of Muhammad that Muslims generally consider to be authentic. The spirit of Torquemada is still alive in the world today, but not among Christians. Rather, it can be found only among the Muslims who demanded that [ex-Muslim] Abdul Rahman be put on trial for his life in Afghanistan in 2006.

Robert Spencer dismisses the idea, so frequently cited by international media, that Christianity is “just as violent” as Islam. At the same time as Muslims are colonizing Western nations while complaining about Islamophobia, the few remaining non-Muslim communities in the Middle East are being systematically eradicated: “Christian communities throughout the Middle East that date back to the dawn of Christianity are decreasing so much that they are on the verge of disappearing from the area altogether. In Iraq half of the nation’s prewar 700,000 Christians have fled the country since the fall of Saddam Hussein. Overall the Middle Eastern Christian population has dropped from 20 percent in 1900 to less than 2 percent today.”

In Christianity, a central tenet is that we “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). In contrast, “While acknowledging that any human being is capable of evil, the Qur’an says that Muslims are ‘the best of peoples’ (3:110) while the unbelievers are the ‘vilest of creatures’ (98:6). In such a worldview it is easy to see evil in others but difficult to locate it in oneself.”

Whereas violent passages in the Bible do exist, for instance in the Book of Joshua on the conquest of Jericho, Spencer demonstrates that “throughout history, rather than celebrating such biblical passages, Jews and Christians have regarded them as a problem to be solved. While interpretations of these passages differ widely among Jews and Christians, from the beginning of rabbinic Judaism and Christianity one understanding has remained dominant among virtually all believers: these passages are not commands for all generations to follow, and if they have any applicability, it is only in a spiritualized, parabolic sense.”

These passages are not taken to mean an open-ended declaration of war against others: “In short, the consensus view among Jews and Christians for many centuries is that unless you happen to be a Hittite, Girgashite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, or Jebusite, these biblical passages simply do not apply to you. The scriptures record God’s commands to the Israelites to make war against particular people only. However this may be understood, and however jarring it may be to modern sensibilities, it does not amount to any kind of marching orders for believers. That’s one principal reason why Jews and Christians haven’t formed terror groups around the world that quote the Bible to justify killing non-combatants.”

The Islamic institution of Jihad, on the other hand, is a command to wage war against the unbelievers until the end of time: “The Qur’an says that the followers of Muhammad are ‘ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another’ (48:29), and that the unbelievers are the ‘worst of created beings’ (98:6). One may exercise the Golden Rule in relation to a fellow Muslim, but according to the laws of Islam, the same courtesy is not to be extended to unbelievers. That is one principal reason why the primary source of slaves in the Islamic world has been non-Muslims, whether Jews, Christians, Hindus, or pagans. Most slaves were non-Muslims who had been captured during jihad warfare.”

Slavery has for almost 1400 years been intimately tied to Jihad on three continents:

Historian Speros Vryonis observes that ‘since the beginning of the Arab razzias [raids] into the land of Rum [the Byzantine Empire ], human booty had come to constitute a very important part of the spoils.’ The Turks, as they steadily conquered more and more of Anatolia, reduced many of the Greeks and other non-Muslims there to slave status: ‘They enslaved men, women, and children from all major urban centers and from the countryside where the populations were defenseless.’ Indian historian K. S. Lal states that wherever jihadists conquered a territory, ‘there developed a system of slavery peculiar to the clime, terrain, and populace of the place.’ When Muslim armies invaded India, ‘its people began to be enslaved in droves to be sold in foreign lands or employed in various capacities on menial and not-so-menial jobs within the country.’

Slaves frequently faced pressure to convert to Islam. Thomas Pellow, an Englishman who was enslaved in Morocco for twenty-three years after being captured as a cabin boy on a small English vessel in 1716, was tortured until he accepted Islam. For weeks he was beaten and starved, and finally gave in after his torturer resorted to “burning my flesh off my bones by fire, which the tyrant did, by frequent repetitions, after a most cruel manner.”

As Spencer says, “Slavery was taken for granted throughout Islamic history. Yet while the European and American slave trades get lavish attention from historians (as well as from mau-mauing reparations advocates and guilt-ridden politicians), the Islamic slave trade actually lasted longer and brought suffering to a larger number of people. It is exceedingly ironic that Islam has been presented to American blacks as the egalitarian alternative to the ‘white man’s slave religion’ of Christianity, as Islamic slavery operated on a larger scale than did the Western slave trade, and lasted longer.”

AbyssiniaFor the record, it should be mentioned that even Islamic sources testify that some of Muhammad’s early followers sought refuge in a Christian kingdom in Ethiopia. Christianity was well-established in sub-Saharan Africa while much of northern Europe was still pagan. It is thus nonsense to claim that Islam is a more authentic “African” religion than Christianity.

Slavery involving peoples of all races was widely practiced in the Greco-Roman world. The most famous slave rebellion during the Roman era was led by Spartacus, a gladiator-slave from the Thracian people who dominated Bulgaria and the Balkan region close to the Black Sea in early historic times. His rebellion was crushed in 71 B.C., and thousands of slaves were crucified alongside the road to Rome as a warning to others. The retreat of slavery in Europe followed the spread of Christianity. In my own Scandinavian region, the Norse culture did practice slavery, yet this was eventually abolished by the Catholic Church.

Unlike the West, there never was a Muslim abolitionist movement since slavery is permitted according to sharia. When the open practice of slavery was finally abolished in most of the Islamic world, this was only due to external Western pressure, ranging from the American war against the Barbary pirates to the naval power of the British Empire. Spencer again:

When the slave trade ended, it was ended not through Muslim efforts but through British military force. Even so, there is evidence that slavery continues beneath the surface in some Muslim countries — notably Saudi Arabia, which only abolished slavery in 1962; Yemen and Oman, both of which ended legal slavery in 1970; and Niger, which didn’t abolish slavery until 2004. In Niger, the ban is widely ignored, and as many as one million people remain in bondage. Slaves are bred, often raped, and generally treated like animals. There are even slavery cases involving Muslims in the United States. A Saudi named Homaidan al-Turki was sentenced in September 2006 to twenty-seven years to life in prison for keeping a woman as a slave in his Colorado home. For his part, al-Turki claimed that he was a victim of anti-Muslim bias.

So, do I have no objections at all to this book? Well, I have one or two. I take issue with the simple assertion that the West is a “Judeo-Christian civilization.” The first recognizably Western people were Greek pagans who had absolutely nothing to do with Christianity and only marginally to do with Judaism. The fact that Christianity has had a profound, and in my view largely positive, influence on our culture is undeniable. However, the civilization that eventually became the West also carries with it a powerful Greco-Roman legacy, supplemented by Germanic and Celtic impulses, etc. This is not nitpicking. The West is too complex to be reduced to just one or two components, and if we want to defend something we have to first define exactly what it is we want to maintain.

Although I don’t hate Christianity, I do think legitimate, rational criticism of it can be made on certain issues. I feel some sympathy for modern Christians. It must be a difficult time for them: They are simultaneously accused of being Fascists and backward fanatics who are worse than Muslims, but also of undermining our culture by being too soft. The first claim is absolutely ridiculous, and Spencer does a fine job of demonstrating why. The second claim isn’t quite as easy to rule out, unfortunately.

The writer John Derbyshire reviewed this book, too. He understands virtually nothing of Islam, and I disagree with him on much of what he wrote about Spencer’s text. Still, Derbyshire did make one valid point: Christian tradition has been a great enabler of globalization. If all men are brothers, would it not be un-Christian to refuse entry to tens of millions of immigrants? “Perhaps the humane forbearance of the Prince of Peace, and the moral universalism that His teachings imply, bear the seeds of self-destruction. Those seeds were slow to germinate in the long centuries when great mass migrations of people into well-settled lands could only be military affairs. However, the globalization movement of the past fifty years has allowed millions of souls to move and settle peaceably into the old Christian lands.”

It is possible to claim that some of the ideas behind the globalist, open-border ideology that now permeates the West are ultimately derived from Christian universalism. It does represent a real problem, not an invented one, when many Christian leaders undermine our national borders by opening their arms to mass immigration, and too many Christian leaders are at the forefront of appeasing Islam in the name of peace and the brotherhood of man.

However, although Christians contribute to our problems sometimes, and they do, by far the worst enablers of Jihad within the West are found among the rabidly secular crowd who believe Christians pose a greater threat to freedom than Muslims and do everything in their power to undermine our traditional culture. On this, I agree with Spencer:

The most formidable and determined enemies of Western civilization may not be the jihadists at all, but the leftists who have located all evil in the Christian West of ‘theocrat’ conspirators, the late Jerry Falwell, the white man’s burden, the legacy of Western slavery, xenophobia, and the rest. These are people who even at a time of peril from global jihad think the chief danger comes not from militant Islam, but from their churchgoing neighbors, and who deride the very faith that set the course of Western civilization and established our basic values.

All things considered, I believe this book to be an excellent read. Spencer’s primary task was no doubt to refute the absurd, yet frequently repeated claims that Christianity is just as violent as Islam and that Christianity has always been an obstacle to freedom. In this, he succeeds rather well. Robert Spencer has a scholarly understanding of the differences between Christian and Islamic theology, yet he does a better job than most in explaining to a mainstream audience in a clear and lucid manner exactly why Islam is a religion with a uniquely high potential for violence. This book is bound to be an eye-opener for the millions of people still parroting the line about Islam being a religion of peace, and the equally numerous crowd of people who have accepted the anti-Christian bigotry presented by Western academia. If you have friends who belong to either of these categories or who simply want to know the true nature of Islam, Religion of Peace? is the perfect Christmas present.

Violence from the Left

I reported yesterday on the fascist-style tactics being used by Sweden’s trade unions to discourage membership in Sverigedemokraterna.

If one were to believe the hysterical pronouncements coming from liberal media organs — and even from some conservatives — a resurgence of right-wing extremism and neo-Nazism is what is most to be feared in Europe. Yet all across the continent, from the marauding members of Antifa in Amsterdam to the burning banlieus of Paris, from the gang-rapes in Malmö to the destroyed churches of Kosovo, the vast majority of street violence is committed either by the Left or the Muslims, or by an alliance of the two.

Violent right-wing outbreaks are as rare in Europe as churches are in Yemen, yet somehow a reincarnation of the Third Reich is the greatest fear. The violence of the Left has been hidden under a blanket of media silence, aided by official indifference, if not tacit support.

But all that is beginning to change. And, as is usual with any change for the better, it’s happening first in Denmark.

Fjordman drew my attention to this important article from yesterday’s Berlingske Tidende, and TB was kind enough to translate it for Gates of Vienna:

SIAD attacked
Violence from the Left

The violence from the Left is being silenced to death by the media. Is it not the time that we wake up to recognize the truth? The Minister of Justice has to answer this.

by Søren Krarup, MP, Danish People’s Party

[Søren Krarup is accused by many on the Left being of being a racist for telling the truth about Islam. Recently he made a speech in Parliament in which he said that Islam as an ideology was comparable to Nazism and Communism. Caused a major stir from the PCs and the Left. — translator]

The first picture is the stalking of Pia Kjærsgaard [leader of the Danish People’s Party] on Christiansborg Slotsplads [The square outside the parliament]. It was, as everybody knows on Tuesday October 2, where the Parliament gathered and where, down on the square, there was a big demonstration. PK went down there to speak to some of the demonstrators, but was harassed and bothered so severely by people from the SFU [The youths from the Socialists People’s Party] and Enhedslisten [The communists] that here security guards asked her to seek shelter behind the walls of Christiansborg, for security reasons, so that she did not run the risk of being assaulted more severely.

No politicians from SF [The Socialists], De Radikale or Enhedslisten have been stalked or driven away from a demonstration on that square by VU [youths from Venstre, the prime minister’s party], KU [youths from The Conservatives] or DFU [youths from the Danish People’s Party]. The violence comes from the Left. The terror of the streets is being practiced by the hopeful youths from SFU and Enhedslisten, and when PK makes Villy Søvndal [the leader of the Socialists] aware of this he explodes in a hollow and empty rage at the podium of the parliament.

Instead of addressing and ending the spiral of violence from his own party’s youth organization.

– – – – – – – –

The second picture is from the recently ended election campaign, and is about the fate of the posters from the rightwing parties. Here you find a systematic wanton destruction. Posters from the Danish People’s Party actually cannot be put up on Nørrebro or Vesterbro in Copenhagen. They were torn down by the hundreds. The rest were either painted over or cut. Also the posters promoting politicians from V and K [Venstre and Conservatives] suffered a rapid and unfortunate fate in the capital, while posters from S [Social Democrats], R [De Radikale]; SF [The Socialists] and Ø (Enhedslisten] were hanging peacefully on the lamp posts, smiling graciously to the people of Copenhagen.

I was myself nominated in Sønderjylland [South Jutland] and often saw my own likeness with horns on my forehead or a Hitler moustache. Respect for the opponent’s right to exist, and speak out for that matter, is not a well-developed property on the left. Here the violence is ruling against free speech.

And worst and most horrifying, the violence from the left manifested itself in the assault that took place on October 21 against the organization “Stop the Islamization of Europe” (SIOE). It happened in Christianshavn in connection with the Saudi Human Right Commission’s [I love this organization; can it get more bizarre. I mean: ‘Human rights’ and ‘Saudi Arabia’ in the same sentence — translator] visiting the Institute of Human rights in Copenhagen. And the violence was so brutal and horrific that it is only by luck that nobody was killed.

Members of the above-mentioned organization, SIOE, had announced legally that they intended to demonstrate. On arrival at the Institute of Human Rights, and still in their car driving down to the parking lot, some autonomous-looking persons [anarchists] smashed the windows. “Pull him out! Pull him out!” the disguised attackers were screaming, while beating the driver of the car and a female passenger with iron clubs. A woman was hit in the head with a full water bottle, and yet another was knifed.

Another participant in the demo was beaten outside and when lying on the ground the autonomous attackers tried to put a knife in him and hit him with iron clubs. A female participant tried to get away but was caught and also beaten with an iron club.

This is what happened. It is well-documented by photographs of the wounded while they were getting loaded into ambulances for hospital treatment. A local janitor/caretaker called the police when the assault started because even though it was a perfectly legitimate demonstration, and even though we have seen this kind of behavior from the Left in earlier incidents, and the attention from the police should therefore already have been there, there was not even one single officer present at this, which was in reality an incident of attempted murder.

Lars Hedegaard compared the incidents with the Nazis’ street terror in Germany. The behavior we are now seeing from the autonomer i in many ways bears a strong resemblance to the Nazis’ use of violence in the last years the of the Weimar Republic where nobody but the Nazis could demonstrate without running the risk of severe assaults and sometimes being killed.

That’s how things are here in Denmark today. And almost worst of all: this horrific violence from the Left is being silenced to death. We have seen no big headlines in the newspapers. The TV has been completely quiet about this attempted political assassination. The journalists show no interest in the bloody behavior from the autonomer.

I ask: Is it not time for us to wake up and recognize the truth? Is it not time that a determined defense of law and order meet the terror of the street?

I will ask the Minister of Justice about this when the Parliament reopens [for the first time since the election, which is today, the 27 of November 2007 — translator].

Veiled Statues From Munich to Vienna

Update: The third link to the photos has been corrected. Sorry for the error.

Veiled sculptureBack in September I wrote about the Anonymous Group of Democratic and Free Thinking, an anti-jihad action organization in Germany.

The group has struck again, veiling statues and sculptures in an overnight operation to draw attention to the consequences facing Europe if Islamization is not reversed. Photos of the results are here.

This time the Anonymous Group of Democratic and Free Thinking extended their operation to cover all the German-speaking areas of Europe. Below is their press release, which was emailed to Gates of Vienna early this morning.

Democracy — how long will it remain?

Veiling of public statues in German-speaking areas

On 27 November 2007, we continued our precious campaign of veiling statues to inform the public about the threat of Islamisation to our democratic and liberal values. With this repeated action in the cities of Zurich, Innsbruck, Vienna, Cologne, Berlin, Heidelberg, Wuppertal, Munich, Osnabrück, and Mönchengladbach, we expanded to Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.

  • 11 statues were veiled with a Burqa or a head scarf.
  • The statues also bear a sash inscribed with a question all German, Swiss and Austrian citizens have to ask themselves: Democracy — how long will it remain?
  • Each statue bears two printed signboards which draw a comparison between the German, Austrian and Swiss constitutions on the one hand and the Quran otherwise. Thus these statues convey the message that many citizens are afraid to say.

The campaign pictures

The aim of this campaign is to point out that creeping Islamisation endangers the European idea of UNITY IN VARIETY in Germany, Austria and Switzerland and, in the long run, also the liberal core values and democracy of entire social and political Europe.

With the veiling of public sculptures, our goal is to draw public attention to the fact that democratic and liberal as well as secular thinking is the most precious value that is to be advocated for and to be protected. We want to show that the public discussion concerning Islam is influenced mainly by one-sided claims for integration, particularly by the so called one-sided demand for tolerance by European societies towards Muslim communities. In our understanding, tolerance and integration have to be carried out by both sides. Everywhere, muslim groups and societies dismiss any serious or credible attempt to prove any kind of tolerance towards “non-believers”.

On the one hand, the granted privileges for those religious-political oriented minorities haven’t lead to any integration success. On the other hand, the European societies seem to lack any willingness to stand up for their values such as liberal thinking, women’s rights or attitudes of solidarity. These processes are leading to strained relations towards parallel societies.

QURAN, Sura 8, Verse 39:
And fight them on till there remains not any mischief and the entire religion be only of Allah.

As long as violence is both a basic tenet in the Quran and an expressed intent of the Islam-ideology, Islam itself cannot be considered as being a religion or an acceptable part of the content frame of Article 4 of the German constitution, of Article 14 of the Austrian constitution and of Article 15 of the Swiss constitution. Our European constitutions do not permit any political or religious movements that refer to force or violence, and no exception is stated for movements that claim exemption because they call themselves a religion.

For example, the Quran imperatives of Sura 8, Verse 39 contradict the German, Austrian and Swiss constitutions, all of which refer to religious freedom and liberal views regarding professions of faiths and beliefs:

(Further examples: Sura 5, verse 52, or Sura 8, verse 40 and 55, or Sura 9, verse 5, or Sura 98, verse 6.)

Our democracy is NOT a God-given good. It is the opposite — for centuries, it has been obtained only through willful and committed efforts. In the religious as well as politically motivated Islam-ideology, we see a threat to European democracy itself. If we all do not advocate for European values and for liberal thinking — to which our societies again and again refer in a very conscious way — our democratic and peaceful Europe will be a phase-out model soon.

Anonymous Group of Democratic and Free Thinking

Below the jump is a detailed list of the statues and sculptures which were veiled overnight.
– – – – – – – –

Zürich:   “Sitting Female”/ “Die Sitzende”, by Hermann Hubacher
  near the Chinese garden, at Zürichsee
Innsbruck:   “Font of Leopold”/ “Leopoldbrunnen”
  by Caspar Gras,
  “Amphitrite” (oceanic nymph, part of the Greek mythology/
  female sovereign of the ocean)
Vienna:   “Empress Elisabeth”- statue by Friedrich Ohmann,
  this statue in sitting posture
  within a disaffiliated
  Construction, Volksgarten Wien
1.   “Font of Neptune”/ “Neptunbrunnen”
  by Reinhold Begas, Spanndauer Straße
2.   “The Caller”/ “Der Rufer”
  by Gerhard Marcks
  Inscription on the pedestal:
  “I pace through the world and
  exclaim peace peace peace”,
  Straße des 17. Juni, Großer Tiergarten,
  median strip towards the Brandenburger Tor
Mönchengladbach:   “Eva II” by Gerhard Marcks,
  at the Adenauerplatz
Osnabrück:   abstract female sculpture by Lothar Fischer
  Inscription of the pedestal:
  “Dedicated to the victims of truth and freedom”,
  near the Dominican Church, at the Rißmüllerplatz,
  49076 Osnabrück,
  30 m within the heavily used streetcircle of the city
Heidelberg:   “Athena-Statue” by Franz Conrad Linck,
  Goddess of town centres, of war, and of wisdoms,
  Patron of the arts,
  Karl-Theodor-Brücke (Alte Brücke),
  connects districts of Heidelberg over the river Neckar
München:   “Maxmonument” by Caspar Zumbusch,
  females at the pedestal,
Wuppertal:   “Mina Knallenfalls”,
  Locally famous,
  pesdestrian area at the Poststrasse,
  near the main station
Cologne:   “Font of Females” or “Females in the Rain”
  by Anneliese Langenbach,
  ten females of Cologne’s 2000 years lasting history
  are portrayed in order to point at females’
  below average presentation in that history

Sheikh for a Day

I feel compelled to post about this news story because it takes place in my other home town. Harrogate is a spa town in lower Nidderdale, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, and it is where I spent the halcyon days of my youth.

From the Sunday Sun:

North show gets to grips with Islam

It is known more for its cream teas than calls to prayer, but the spa town of Harrogate is the setting of a new reality show in which people are persuaded to live under Islamic conditions. Will the programme aid religious cohesion or create division?

A controversial reality TV show to be broadcast next month aims to challenge preconceptions about Muslims.

But the programme, which sees non-Muslims living under strict Sharia law for three weeks, could also reinforce some people’s intolerance towards Islam.

One participant accused Imams featured in the three-part series of being prejudiced towards her and said she experienced “animosity” from them.

– – – – – – – –

Another, however, was surprised by the “confrontational” and “aggressive attitude” British people had towards her as a result of her temporary conversion to a Muslim way of life.

Film maker Narinder Minhas chose the affluent market town of Harrogate in North Yorkshire for his bold experiment… a place that is home to just 311 Muslims in a population of 60,000.

His guinea pigs include a mixed race couple, a gay hairdresser, an atheist taxi driver and a glamour model… all of whom are called upon to give up unmarried sex, alcohol and pork, pray regularly and dress modestly for three weeks.

Minhas, the man behind reality shows Priest Idol and Indian Finishing School, wanted to make the documentary after tiring of too many “po-faced” programmes about Islam.

He said: “I wanted to make a series that had some humour in it. I’m tired of seeing guys with beards who are a bit scary. I wanted to explore how white people come to grips with a religion they’ve kind of heard of. I wanted to portray those people as human beings who go through a range of emotions.”

However, one of the show’s participants, Carla Newbury-Jones, had mixed feelings about it… and found little to laugh about.

The property entrepreneur’s partner, Muslim Ashley Ashiq, proposed to her during filming.

But Carla, 34, said she found the Imams’ strong disapproval of their relationship very disturbing. She believes they were prejudiced towards her because she is Christian and white.

She revealed: “It was a really uncomfortable experience and I was so glad when it was over.


“I felt they looked down at me because I was white and not a Muslim. We have a beautiful relationship and refuse to let other people’s biased attitudes get in the way.

I fully expect the Law of Unintended Consequences to work itself out in this little media gem.

Hat tip: LN.

The Jihad Driving School

The Jihad Driving School

Steen sent me a link to the above photo, which can be found on the Swedish blog Norra Grängesbergsgatan. It was taken in Malmö, the South Swedish city which is notorious for its crime, its unemployment, and its huge number of immigrant residents, most of them Muslims.

Steen isn’t much for translating things, but I’ll go out on a limb and gloss the name of the business as:

“Jihad Driving School — Private Lessons”

(“Körkort” means “driving license”.)

That’s all I know about it. We’ll have to wait for the Swedes to show up so that they can give us more background on this fascinating topic.

[Nothing follows]

What Is Missing in Those Pictures?

Is there a polite way to point out another’s blind spots, especially when they erect the foundations of their beliefs on a pile of sand and then expect them to stand up to scrutiny?

I’ve been pondering how that might be done in this case, but there’s no way to get around the fact that Gates of Vienna is viewed by some blogs as having an inability to see that its allies are racist neo-Nazis while these critics cannot see their own fundamental preferences.

It does no good to point out that those we support — Sweden Democrats and Vlaams Belang — are doing a good job at attracting regular citizens to their cause…that “cause” in part being a coordinated effort to stop the dhimmification of their countries. This is a cause that no one on the left in either case will ever support. In fact, they have repeatedly demonized and attempted to marginalize anyone who takes off their rose-colored glasses and refuses to see the official EU diversity rainbow — which doesn’t exist in reality. For too many Europeans, this phantom rainbow is merely a pointer to the road to Hell.

James Lewis’ essay on the disinformation being spread by Belgium psyops, which I reprinted here seemed to me to be an accurate scenario about what was happening after the very successful CVF Conference in Brussels. The anti-Vlaams Belang Walloons’ security folks couldn’t let that success stand, so they began working to discredit it. They’re still tunneling.

They’ve labored hard and their labors have borne fruit. Any number of normally reasonable people have vilified us or argued with us regarding what we did in Brussels. Sometimes these arguments have led to estrangement from people we formerly considered allies.

Take our decision to leave The Infidel Bloggers Alliance. This choice evolved slowly, finally coming to fruition yesterday. It was with great regret that I decided it was time to go, and I gave the truth about our decision, but only part of the truth, since my concern was to avoid an argument on grounds that cannot really be argued.

The reason they can’t be stated is that our interlocutors cannot stand outside their own prejudices to see the point of all this. In fact, they’re not even aware of their propensity to choose those like themselves.

I have two responses to their accusations, one on process, one on procedure.

I’ll deal with the procedure first.

In “Time to Go” I made the point that the rules about posting had been changed without notice. We didn’t find out about them ahead of time. The issue only came up when we tried to post and found our efforts waaay down the page as soon as we put them up — without being notified that this was being done until we looked on the page:

When someone changes the rules in the game without prior notice, it means it’s time to go, because the meta-rule of courtesy — i.e., no changes without notice — has been violated.

It’s understandable that the blog administrators wanted to guarantee prominence for certain posts. However, since we were not allowed to post-date our own essays, this meant that our freshly-posted material sometimes appeared far down the page. So what would be the point of anyone else posting at all?


You know how it is: them what has the marbles calls the game, and if you don’t like it, go home. Amen, brother. That’s exactly what we’re doing. I just hope the door doesn’t hit us in the gluteus maximus on the way out.

Now, that last sentence could have been left out. But I felt tricked by a hidden double standard and wanted to express how that felt.

Pastorius left a polite comment of regret on my post, but Epaminondas’ comment was way off the mark. Besides not noticing that I wrote this post (is that a presumption of male authority? hmmm) Epaminondas said:

Baron, what you are objecting to is losing what other posters there never did.

Arrogate to themselves the top slot by post dating the post.

That is left to the admin, and as Connor McCloud knows, there can really be only one.

Just my $.02

If there are objectively, temporally later posts, they go the top.

But never the less, sorry to see you go.

Obviously, Epaminondas wasn’t in the loop regarding Pastorius’ administrative decision, so the Baron corrected his explanation with this comment:

Baron, what you are objecting to is losing what other posters there never did.

Arrogate to themselves the top slot by post dating the post.

Evidently Pastorius neglected to cc you on our email exchange.

The first time I that I put up an essay at IBA and found that it came up below the top post, I thought it was some Blogger malfunction, due to IBA being set to zulu time. So I changed the time on my post to correct what I thought was the problem.

Pastorius then informed me that only administrators were allowed to post-date.

OK, that’s cool. Then the next post I put up a couple of days later came fourth in the list, with the top post (yours, actually) being dated a full 24 hours ahead.

I noticed that the three post-dated articles were all critical of Vlaams Belang, “neo-Nazis”, etc.

Is that a coincidence? Hard to tell.

But it very conveniently highlights the opinions of the blog administrator and buries any dissenting viewpoints.

I consider that tactic to be inhibiting of any useful discussion, and — since my input was being effectively consigned to the memory hole by being pushed way down the page — there was no option but to withdraw.

You can put all the lipstick and rouge that you want on this particular infidel pig, but it won’t disguise an obvious illiberal ploy to keep alternative viewpoints from being seen at the Infidel Bloggers Alliance.

It’s very sad, because it used to be a great place.

Okay, that takes care of the procedural housekeeping. Change the rules without notice and you create a different environment.

That out of the way, I must now deal with process, because that is where the fundamental differences reside: in a house built by the blind on a foundation of sand.
– – – – – – – –
Pastorius has stated that he cannot support Vlaams Belang because they are racist. I won’t argue that point — his mind is made up. But I will quote his words and his actions in order to examine the gap between his rhetoric and reality. Here, he says:

By the way, I have had people arguing with me on this subject at IBA. One of the points that was made against my argument is that I am being purely selfish; as in, I have a multiracial family, therefore, I believe my point (against the BNP) of view is valid.

Just to be clear, no that is not the order in which things take place.

I have always believed that all people are children of God, and that, as such, we have the same rights, and ought to be accorded the same dignity. Additionally, it is clear to me that there are people of all races who are intelligent, and who are capable of, and willing to live in Western society.

I would ally myself with anyone who is intelligent, good, and capable of, and willing to live in Western society.

And, that is why my family is multiracial.

In other words, I married a dark-skinned woman because I believe in the values of Western civilization, not the other way around.

And on his blog he says:

Those who support Ethnic Nationalism are, at this point, in the minority in Europe as far as I can tell.

Well, given that point of view, one would think he would find women of other ethnicities and races attractive. But look at the evidence for his contention, which is contradicted by the reality in his blog.

There are many sociologists who would argue that choosing one’s own kind is a built-in part of any animal’s hard-wiring. Sometimes you can build a work-around and get your cat and dog to make nice, but generally they don’t get along. It is only with the ubiquitous Marxist programming of the Left foisted off on all of us that we have been made to parrot this specious thinking regarding “diversity”.

In fact, in “Time to Go” two commenters have a dialogue that lays open the internal contradiction between Pastorius’ words and what he chooses to pay attention to. And in doing so, they prove my point.

Ypp, one of our commenters on the “Time to Go” post, says:

At the Infidel blogger alliance they made a decent attempt to fight Islam with pornography. But I am afraid that won’t work. Since 1001 Nights and god knows how many virgins expecting them in the Heaven, muslims are not afraid of pornography. They seem to go with it pretty well.

But Conservative Swede notices something else, something vital about this feature on The Infidel Bloggers Alliance:

…Have you noticed? Only white women….


2 years and 12 photos of “infidel babes”, and only white women, all the way.. I know some people that would say that this looks kind of racist. Isn’t it said that the most widespread and effective racial discrimination is the deep structural one? [my emphasis -D] How their preferences always make these people choose people like themselves when they employ someone, choose a friend or a date, etc. This makes IBA look like an echo chamber of white people, the kind who live in bubbles of all-white communities. Of course I’m not saying that it is so, but it surely gives that impression.

I’m sure the people at IBA will innocently say: “But we prefer white women”. But you see, that’s a racist argument.

A Freudian would surely say that the way the people at IBA are so quick at accusing other people of racism is a projection of their own guilt feelings. Now I do not care much for Freudians, but surely IBA would want to do something about this, to appear more serious and less hypocritical in the future. Let’s say a black “babe” next time, and thereafter an Asian “babe”. And from there on staying within reasonable quotas.

I think the problem for IBA is that if they do not repudiate this their obvious preference for whites, they will look just like Dewinter. He expressed a preference for whites back in 1991, and it’s still haunting him. And unless IBA does something decisive about this, I think it will haunt them forever too. Actions speak louder than words. IBA will need to show actively in their “babe” page that they celebrate diversity.

So at the moment, due to his choices to post only pictures of white women only for the last two years, Pastorius’ behavior looks no different than what he accuses the Great White Racist, Filip Dewinter, of doing.

If it looks like a duck, and quacks like duck… is it really a rose?

Some Days the Bear Eats You

Teddy’s bearAs every American schoolboy knows, the teddy bear was originally called “Teddy’s Bear”. The earliest teddy bear was a popular stuffed toy manufactured and sold in New York in the early 20th century after a bear cub became associated with President Theodore Roosevelt via a well-known political cartoon.

Mr. Roosevelt had developed a thick skin from his years in the rough-and-tumble of American politics, and he didn’t particularly mind his name being given to the teddy bear.

But the same can’t be said of Mohammed, who has taken great offense and sent his zealous servants to exact revenge: a British schoolteacher in Sudan faces prison and flogging for naming her pupils’ stuffed bear “Mohammed”. From today’s Daily Mail:

British teacher faces 40 lashes in Sudan for naming a teddy bear Mohamed

A British teacher is facing 40 lashes from police in Sudan where she has been accused of insulting Islam after naming a Teddy bear Mohamed.

Gillian Gibbons, 54, was being questioned at a police station in the capital Khartoum.

She had been working at one of the city’s exclusive British schools for the past three months since giving up her job in Liverpool.

Police arrived at the old-fashioned brick and stone buildings of the Unity High School on Sunday to arrest Miss Gibbons after a complaint from parents that she had named the bear after Islam’s most holy prophet Mohamed.

An angry mob shouted death threats as she was taken away.

– – – – – – – –

The school remained closed yesterday and children were sent home for fear of reprisals from Islamic extremists.

Robert Boulos, the school’s director, said the teacher had made an innocent mistake.

“We have lost one of our best teachers. She was maybe a little naive but she really had no idea what she was doing.”

The teddy bear had been brought to school by one of Miss Gibbon’s six and seven-year-old pupils as part of a project.

They were asked to take the bear home each weekend and keep a diary of his activities.

The class voted on a name and settled on Mohamed — also the name of one of the most popular pupils.

“No parents or teachers complained because they knew she had no bad intentions,” said Mr Boulos.

“She has done nothing wrong but now we are very concerned that there’s a risk to the school and the students from the men in the street.

He added that the problem only came to light last week after parents complained to the ministry of education.

The school would stay closed until January, he said.

Miss Gibbons faces six months in prison, a fine or 40 lashes if convicted of insulting the Prophet Mohamed.

There’s much more background at the full news story.

Notice that the little children themselves are the ones who named the bear. I wonder what punishment they will face…

Hat tip: HTP.

Brownshirt Tactics Against Sverigedemokraterna

Are you tired of looking under Vlaams Belang’s bed for neo-Nazis?

When you open the Sweden Democrats’ closet, are the skeletons that fall out less than satisfyingly fascist?

Do you want to know where the real Nazis are in Europe?

I’ll tell you where they are: they’re on the Left, the same place they’ve always been.

Ever since Rosa Luxemburg’s bully boys were beating up on Ernst Röhm’s bully boys on the streets of Berlin in the early ’20s, the thugs of the Left have been the champions of coercive force and the strong-arm methods. When the swastika-clad crowds roared their “Sieg Heil!” at Nürnberg, the forces of thuggish Socialism were in the ascendant. The only argument back then was between those who wanted their Socialism national, and those who preferred it international.

The single greatest success of the Left over the last seventy years has been to convince a gullible public that fascism and Nazism were of the Right. It was the great victory of Socialism.

You could call it the Triumph of the Will.

Consider this particular example of modern Multicultural fascism being visited upon Sverigedemokraterna (the Sweden Democrats), the only party in Sweden that resists the country’s official policy of unlimited Third World immigration. The Nazi-style arm-twisting is, as usual, coming from the Left:

Unions mull Sweden Democrat ban

Members of the far-right Sweden Democrats should be denied trade union membership, according to a large proportion of leading union representatives.

– – – – – – – –

Almost a third (31 percent) of district chairmen in the IF Metall, Grafikerna and Pappers unions would like to see a ban placed on Sweden Democrat (SD) members, despite the fact that the party gains more support from union members than from the population as a whole.

A survey carried out by Novus Opinion on behalf of Dagens Arbete has shown that 5.8 percent of the country’s industrial workers would vote for the right-wing populist party if there was an election today.

Of the trade unions surveyed, IF Metall’s district chairmen were most critical, with 49 percent calling for a ban on Sweden Democrat members. 22 percent of Grafikernas’ chairmen and 13 percent of Pappers’ chairmen also supported the idea of banning Sweden Democrats.

But the district heads did not have the backing of their national chairmen.

“SD is an undemocratic organization that advocates things that we don’t share. But to issue a general ban on members is not something I think we should do,” Pappers chairman Jan-Henrik Sandberg told Dagens Arbete.

But this, of course, is not where the danger lies. The danger in Europe, as everyone knows, comes from a resurgent neo-fascist Right.

And if you believe that, I’ve got this little piece of swampland in Florida that you might be interested in buying…

Hat tip: TB.

Time to Go

Time to goWith regret, the Baron and I are withdrawing from participation in the Infidel Bloggers Alliance. This is a sad moment, because we enjoyed our time there; it was often rewarding to take part in a forum with other anti-jihad contributors.

Although we have had our disagreements of late, this is not the reason for our departure. Unfortunately, a very recent change in the rules regarding posting there has guaranteed that the administrators’ post-dating of particular articles would make then appear at the top — even if ours was a more recent post.

When someone changes the rules in the game without prior notice, it means it’s time to go, because the meta-rule of courtesy — i.e., no changes without notice — has been violated.

It’s understandable that the blog administrators wanted to guarantee prominence for certain posts. However, since we were not allowed to post-date our own essays, this meant that our freshly-posted material sometimes appeared far down the page. So what would be the point of anyone else posting at all?

The other day when the Baron put up a post at IBA it appeared as the fourth post, way down the page. It may not have been the intention of the administrators to punish unwelcome opinions by lowering their visibility, but it nevertheless had that effect. Just an unintended consequence, but not one I am willing to tolerate.

You know how it is: them what has the marbles calls the game, and if you don’t like it, go home. Amen, brother. That’s exactly what we’re doing. I just hope the door doesn’t hit us in the gluteus maximus on the way out.

IBA will remain on our blogroll. It is a comprehensive and informative site.

[The End]

His Grace Stumbles…Again

Victor David Hanson tells us “Why You Can Believe all Those Warnings About The Death of the West”

“I suggest that the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams read a little history about the British experience in India before he offers politically-correct but historically laughable sermons like the one he gave to a Muslim “lifestyle” magazine:”

It is one thing to take over a territory and then pour energy and resources into administering it and normalising it. Rightly or wrongly, that’s what the British Empire did – in India, for example. It is another thing to go in on the assumption that a quick burst of violent action will somehow clear the decks and that you can move on and other people will put it back together – Iraq, for example.

Then Mr. Hanson proceeds to take His Grace apart, limb from Christian limb:

“ONE, who is clearing the decks and moving on? And who are the “other people” putting Iraq back together? Iran? Saudi Arabia? China? The British in Basra? First, we read from the anti-war Left that the US is wasting a trillion dollars and thousands of its lives in Iraq, and yet now that we are clearing the decks and not putting it back together? Which is it?”

[Mr. Hanson should know by now that being the Archbishop of Canterbury means never having to be consistent and never, ever apologizing to anyone except designated victims.]

“TWO, Williams should read a little about British military campaigns in India, and then count the corpses.”
– – – – – – – –
[If you check the seminary curriculum you will find precious little secular history included. Why would they need it? Greek is much more important to leading your flock]

“THREE, he should also tally up the amount of money the U.S. has spent for civic and economic development in Iraq over four years, and then compare that to what Britain invested in any four-year period in their centuries-long occupation of India.”

[ Maths or statistics are not strong points in seminary training either, Mr. Hanson. His Grace is talking about relevance here, not about truth]

“FOUR, I don’t recall the British, after their second year in India, fostering nation-wide elections.”

[Well, you see, they were waiting to Gandhi to appear and make them do something. You know…until then, it was the White Man’s Burden.. Tut, tut, cheerio…]

“FIVE, if he is worried about the soul of civilization in general, and the U.S. in particular, he might equally ask his Muslim interviewers about the status of women in the Muslim world, polygamy, female circumcision, the existence of slavery in the Sudan, the status of free expression and dissent, and religious tolerance (i.e., he should try to visit Mecca on his next goodwill, interfaith tour) .”

[Oh dear. This is all about political correctness, not hard questions. His Grace has had the requisite lobotomy that accompanies investiture. He is no longer able to frame such questions, much less get them past his lips. Be gentle.]

“SIX, all Williams will accomplish is to convince Episcopalians in the U.S. not to follow the Anglican Church, and most Americans in general that, if they need any reminders, many of the loud left-wing British elite, nursed on envy of the US, still petulant over lost power and influence, and scared stiff of the demographic and immigration trends in its own country, are well, unhinged.”

[Now you’re talking Mr Hanson. We don’t need His Grace any more. African missionaries are saving what is left of the Episcopal Church in the US. In fact, the next time there is a space shuttle flight, perhaps His Grace would consider a short trip. I would certainly donate a farthing or two towards his mission. It would be more useful than anything he is doing here.]

African bishopBy the way, America’s Presiding Bishop is not too happy about this interference in her work (driving people out of the pews):

The American presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, condemned this poaching of souls on her turf as a violation of the “ancient customs of the church.” To which the archbishop replied, in essence: Since when have you American liberals given a fig about the ancient customs of the church?

Such conflicts used to be decided in the Church of England by the king putting someone in the Tower of London. That does not appear to be an option in this case.

Well, maybe that’s what ECUSA needs at 815 Second Avenue in New York City: a tower in which to put the poachers.

Hat tip: Michael B

Making Filip Dewinter Dance

Boy Scout souvenir coin

The photo above shows the obverse and reverse of an old Boy Scout souvenir coin, passed down to me by my father among his memorabilia. As you can see, the coin was actually a promotional item issued by the Excelsior Shoe Co. of Portsmouth, Ohio.

On the obverse is a Boy Scout (presumably wearing Excelsior Original Boy Scout Shoes) riding a horse.

On the reverse is — gasp! — a SWASTIKA!

At last the racist and white supremacist nature of the Boy Scouts has been exposed! Everyone who has ever been a Boy Scout — from Franklin Delano Roosevelt through Gerald R. Ford to the future Baron Bodissey — has become tainted by the association with that foul symbol. Only a public repudiation of their past Nazi affiliations could ever begin to repair the reputations of those affected.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Actually, as we all know, until about 1930 the swastika was a perfectly respectable symbol. “Swastika” is the Sanskrit term for the design, and was picked up by the British in India and passed into common English usage. It was known as a tetragammadion (“four gammas”) by the Greeks, and as a fylfot (“many-foot”) in northern Europe.

The fylfot symbol is of indefinitely ancient provenance. It has been found in Scythian tombs on the Central Asian steppes, inscribed on grave goods that date from the third millennium B.C. Up until the early 20th century it was widely considered a good luck charm, and was painted on heraldic shields, used for insignia by the U.S. Army, and carried by early airplane pilots.

But, like the jersey number of a great football player, it has since been retired. Until the word “Nazi” is forgotten, the swastika can have only one meaning.

The same cannot be said of the Celtic Cross. Filip Dewinter, a leader of the Vlaams Belang party, has found himself in hot water due to his evident possession of a Celtic Cross. Those who are eager to smear him as a white supremacist and neo-Nazi are certain what it means to him.

But the Celtic Cross can still have other meanings, even in Flanders, where it can be found on gravestones in the cemeteries of the Great War.

Since every other charge leveled at Mr. Dewinter has proved to be bogus, the Celtic Cross looms large in the current attacks, but its significance to him is not known.

Belgium is currently in the midst of the largest constitutional crisis in its history, with Vlaams Belang and Filip Dewinter playing a pivotal role in the unfolding events. Answering the shrill cries of “neo-Nazi!” being flung at him from across the Atlantic is probably not high on the list of his priorities.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

In response to the Infidel Bloggers Alliance version of my recent post, Epaminondas made this comment:
– – – – – – – –

I advise you, Baron, in all good will, to FORGET Johnson, and deal with the tangible and factual words of Phillip Dewinter himself, who I heard give an excuse for ‘white europe’ which had it been uttered by Hillary, Carl Levin, John Conyers, or any of that ilk would have us all, both hysterically laughing, and ill.

You know him, why don’t you get HIM to see the error of HIS ways, and HIS symbols and HIS words instead, and repudiate such ideas NOT as a metaphor but as both wrong and politically impossible

I have had about a dozen people listen to Dewinter’s shire interview. None of them knew anything else (why would we know about flemish domestic issues), but what they heard. Every single person who has heard DeWinter has had the same reaction.

Except for knowing there was a fight going on and the edges of it, neither did I when I first heard it.

Dewinter’s words remain those of white supremacy, with an attempted leavening by Clintonista parsing. It is that, and his sliding around on it which convinced me, not anything by Johnson.

It is DeWinter.

To me that is the Schwerpunkt of this. I have heard NO effective refutation, nor has there even been much of any attempt.

No taint of white supremacy, NOMATTER the perceived situation can be allowed to destroy what is, to all the people I know, a bunch of nuts like us to begin with.

It is tough enough. Allies such as that make it HARDER not better.

I am NO newcomer.

Apparently it has somehow become my task to get Filip Dewinter, a respected leader in a prominent European political party, to “see the error of his ways,” and to “repudiate such ideas”.

The word “presumption” doesn’t even begin to cover such breathtaking prescriptions.

Anybody else want to go to Flanders and convince Filip Dewinter of the error of his ways? Mind if I watch while he laughs in your face?

But seriously — it’s ludicrous in the extreme to demand that a seasoned politician with a proven track record of serving the voters in his country justify his actions to me or any other American blogger.

For what it’s worth, this was my response to Epaminondas:


Actually, I had a long talk on this very topic with Filip Dewinter when I was in Flanders last month. I was wearing the Danish-and-Israeli-flags pin that Anders Gravers had given me in Copenhagen last April. I showed it to him and suggested that Vlaams Belang might want to do something similar, in order to help dispel the notion that VB is an anti-Semitic or neo-Nazi party.

He said, “Oh, yes, we already have those. I can show you.” He explained about the strong support that he receives from the Orthodox community in Antwerp, and the fact that the Chief Rabbi of a rabbi in Antwerp is one of his advisors.

Now, you can say that this is irrelevant, that these Antwerp Jews are like the Jews that support Ahmadinejad, and that their support means nothing, even though there are many more of them who support Vlaams Belang than would ever support Mad Jad.

But consider these three facts together:

1.   Vlaams Belang has actively and publicly courted support from among Jews in Flanders, and has received that support;
2.   Vlaams Belang is the only party in Belgium that strongly and consistently supports Israel; and
3.   The real neo-Nazis revile Vlaams Belang and sneer at their leaders for being in bed with the Jews.

Doesn’t that mitigate against there being any current anti-Semitism in the policies of Vlaams Belang?

I can’t see into Filip Dewinter’s heart. Perhaps he hates Jews, but finds it expedient to court them. Perhaps he used to feel differently in his youth, but has outgrown such a position, just as Robert Byrd has with respect to the KKK.

Or perhaps he has never felt any antipathy to the Jews.

In any case, I take Christ’s words to heart: “By their fruits ye shall know them.”

By their fruits, Filip Dewinter and Vlaams Belang are not anti-Semitic.

As for the demand that he repudiate his alleged past: why is the above not a sufficient repudiation? Why would he need to grovel before certain Americans who know virtually nothing about him or Flanders?

This is the quintessence of arrogance. Filip Dewinter is not going to repudiate anything based on our demands. He is not aware of our demands, and would consider them impertinent and irrelevant to his cause if he were aware of them.

Why would he need to dance to our tune in the first place? What good would it do him to abase himself before the American gods of PC?

O, Faustus, leave these frivolous demands,
Which strike a terror to my fainting soul!

Update: The discussion in the comments has led me to expand on what I said above.

Two things are at issue here, content and process. Many people, in the heat of the argument, mix up the content and the process. I’ll tackle them separately.


The two parts of the process that I take issue with are these:

1. That a political movement must be pure, without stain, absolutely clear of any taint whatsoever of association with people and groups that are deemed beyond the pale.

This is absurd and counterproductive. Adhering to this kind of Manichean purity serves only to guarantee that no political action whatsoever can be achieved. No party has ever been successful without compromising and allying with groups that are at least somewhat distasteful. To aspire to this kind of whiter-than-white (sorry; infelicitous metaphor) cleanliness is to guarantee our failure and the victory of our enemies.

2. That American bloggers or opinion journalists can demand that a Flemish politician explain each and every tidbit of his history.

This is hubris of the highest order. To expect that Mr. Dewinter adhere to our standards, or even explain himself to us, is ridiculous.

Also, once again, it puts forward a Platonic ideal that is unattainable this side of the grave.


In the quest for absolute ideological purity, self-righteous critics of Vlaams Belang are overlooking its very real accomplishments, which we should be applauding and supporting. Nothing that the party has done since the beginning of this millennium reflects badly on them.

Why don’t these facts matter more than that cross?

I’ll repeat what I wrote in the comments:

I honestly don’t know the answer [to what the Celtic Cross means to Filip Dewinter] — if I did I would post it — but given the time and the milieu in which Mr. Dewinter lived, and the nature of Flemish politics, a sympathy and/or association with “white power” groups would not be at all surprising.

The same can be said of other groups all across Europe. The reigning socialist orthodoxy has forced patriots and people who are proud of their culture into the same bed as the white power freaks. Once forced by the elites into that smelly little ghetto, all patriotic expression can be condemned as “neo-Nazism”.

It’s a nice little catch, that Catch-22.

That’s why I want to draw the discussion away from what Filip Dewinter feels to what he does. The behavior of Vlaams Belang is manifestly something we all should support — pro-Israel, pro-free market, in favor of smaller government, etc. And all the while they endure the taunts of the real neo-Nazis for being Jew-lovers.

Why doesn’t all that count?

I still say: by their fruits ye shall know them

Further update: See the comments for Carl’s question about the Chief Rabbi of Antwerp. After checking with some of my contacts who know more than I do, I found out that the rabbi I mentioned above is not in fact the Chief Rabbi of Antwerp. I don’t know his position in the rabbinical hierarchy. This is my own error.

I know the man’s name, but I haven’t yet received permission to post it.

Yo Ho Ho and a Bottle of Snaps

During the recent election in Denmark, the strong showing by the Dansk Folkeparti (Danish People’s Party) and the weak performance by the Social Democrats has strengthened Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s government. This has given the West’s strongest bastion in the Counterjihad a breathing space, time to consolidate its stringent measures against further immigration and continue the resistance against PC Multiculturalism.

Given the sad news of Australia’s election, the things going on in Denmark are a balm.

Wretchard, at the Belmont Club, was in an elegiac frame of mind when he posted on Australia’s future under the coming leadership by The Green Party. Can you say “Kyoto Treaty signing as soon as possible” or “bring home the troops, double time”? Those will the new policies, among many other unpleasantries. Wretchard’s gaze is unflinching:

In the end, Howard’s loss probably has to be put down to hubris. His margin over Labor and the Left was always much thinner than his oversized image seemed to indicate. His image was so oversized, in fact, that it probably kept a new generation of leaders from rising within his party. On the other hand, Labor ran through a succession of losers until they came to Rudd, who realized he had to run to the right of his predecessors. That cut away Howard’s already thin cushion. I guess he thought the old magic would pull him through. But tonight, the magic deserted him. Howard will probably lose even his own seat of Bennelong to a celebrity Labor candidate.

Most readers can probably make a fair guess of what might happen next. The chances are we’ll be looking at Kevin Rudd reprising Nancy Pelosi. The end of the Howard era may be a good thing in the end. Labor will ultimately provide the energy for its own downfall, as the Liberals (Howard’s party) did theirs.

But no one who has been through the wars that Wretchard has — and survived them — can fail to view these events sub specie aeternitas. He ponders how things take shape under the vast canopy woven by history. Thus, he ends his rumination on the ramifications of this sad turn for his adopted country with a philosophical shrug:

I’ve learned over time not to get too disappointed about anything. Looking back, I can remember the long fight against Marcos [W. is from the Philippines — D]. So long it seemed it would never end. Most of us can still recall how dim things seemed only a few months ago, not only looking toward Iraq but pretty much everywhere. But that was then; and this is now.

So in a little bit I’m going to go and swill down a beer and think of old times. The guys who missed dodging that last raindrop. The day no one got off the bus. And as for old John Howard, well, he had a good run.

And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods.

I admit, I was a bit teary by the end of his post. But then…but then… our Danish correspondent TB translated an article from today’s Jyllands-Posten and sent it to the Baron. I grabbed at this news the way you pull yourself up onto the life raft that suddenly appears amidst the large waves you’d somehow been dumped into.

TB’s translation is followed by his commentary:

Danish warship to fight against pirates

The AbsalonThe government is planning to use the warship Absalon in the UN mission against pirates on the Horn of Africa.

Information from Danmarks Radio [Danish National radio].

According to the chief in command of the Danish Navy the UN have asked for Danish assistance, and the navy’s plan is to offer the new and very big [“big” according to Danish measures; no carrier battle groups here – translator] warship as a command ship in a UN mission for half a year starting from August of next year.

– – – – – – – –

The plan has to be approved in Christiansborg [Folktinget, the parliament], where the Social Democrats’ spokesman for foreign affairs, Mogens Lykketoft, states to the national Danish radio that he feels positive about the idea.

Absalon is 137 meters long, heavily armed, and equipped with the newest technology and electronics. On the mission to Africa the crew will consist of around 150 men.

Unofficially Denmark can join the battle against pirates already as of the new year. Sources tell Radioavisen that France has asked for Danish assistance – which should be understood as a thank-you for the contribution from France in connection with the freeing of the hostages from Danica White in August.

If the French request is honored, according to the sources of Radioavisen it is the navy’s plan to use the recon-ship Thetis [normally patrolling Greenland – translator] for the French mission, which is designated as an escort for UN ships transporting first-aid for Somalia.

“All countries in the world have an interest in getting rid of these pirates, but Denmark has not only an interest but also a responsibility, because of all our shipping companies who carry 10% of the world’s goods transported by sea. That’s why we in this new government resolution have written that we will fight this nuisance. We saw in connection with the Danica White that it is also traumatic to those who are affected directly. But in the end it is a political decision,” minister of defense Søren Gade says to Ritzau.

TB adds his own point of view to this news:

I can tell you that right now they are also discussing whether to deploy F16s and Special Forces in Afghanistan.

Soon there will be nobody but the Muslims left here in Denmark! Everybody else will be out there fighting the great fight.

Thinking about this news report, it seems to me that Denmark is evolving into part of the Anglosphere. It must be all that Danish DNA that was inserted into the English gene pool before there ever was an England. So Australia is overtaken by the greenies for the moment, but Denmark is leaving the port to take care of the pirates, just as the U.S. did in her very beginnings.

The shores of Tripoli beckon once more and good strong men answer the call.

Hat tip: madsvp

Setting Up Your Very Own Secret Service

Our Dutch correspondent H. Numan offers this bureaucratic parable of ambition and influence within the government of the Netherlands.

Then it turns out that it isn’t a parable after all…

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Setting Up Your Very Own Secret Service
by H. Numan

Impossible you say? Not quite. It can be done, and you don’t need any experience in the field at all. Here’s how you do it.

First you start in a government agency. Any will do. In this case, let’s start in a nice innocent ministry. Say, the ministry of agriculture. Can’t be more harmless than that, can it? There you make sure you get promoted to the top using the age old system of “licking and kicking”: you lick yourself upwards, while you kick anything in your way downwards.

Make absolutely sure your superiors cannot find any fault in your work. None whatsoever. Fire anyone making mistakes. Promote harmless people, and make certain you have some dirt on each them. Just in case. One can never be too certain. Sooner or later you become secretary general.

Expect some setbacks along the way. In this case, a parliamentary commission wasn’t too keen to see you as secretary general running your own shop. It might have worked, of course. But not only you had some dirt just about anybody, so did others on you. Fortunately, since you have reached the upper echelon of civil positions, you are unassailable. Thus, the parliamentary commission offered you another nice cushy job. Director of the UWV, the government unemployment body. Now you are in charge of everybody unemployed. Not quite what you wanted, but not too shabby either.

So you start again. This time not from the bottom, but at the very top. You don’t like your office. A director in charge of half a million unemployed should have something better than that. No problem, you have the whole office redecorated.

As you are the crème de la crème, you really don’t want that cheap IKEA stuff. You hire an interior decorator to do the job. Everything must be handmade. Expensive? Why, it’s only money! You’ve got plenty of that. After all, those lazy buggers you are in charge of should find a job anyway.

Tjibbe Joustra’s office
The office of Tjibbe Joustra in the building of the UWV unemployment institute in Amsterdam

Strangely enough, some people object. They can’t seem to understand that you need a private office for a trifling three million Euros. They can’t really fire you; your position is much too high for that. So the best they can do is get you sidestepped.

National Coordinator of Terrorism ControlNow you are almost there. Your new job is National Coordinator of Terrorism Control (NCTB). “A promotion to an inactive post”, as one might say. At least that is what your enemies think. You know much better. You have arrived. What is inactive can be very active, if you make it so. “Houston, the hyena has landed!”
– – – – – – – –
Your job is to coordinate the various government agencies fighting against terrorism. Now, none of those agencies likes you very much, and all you are allowed to do is coordinate. You don’t have a large staff, no secret agents, not a large budget. But being the proverbial civil servant that you are, you don’t worry. Nor do you care. A civil servant worth his pension makes things happen the bureaucratic way.

They say lots of nasty things about you, but everybody has to admit you really are the proverbial civil servant. Sir Humphrey Appleby from the BBC series “Yes Minister” is a toddler compared to you.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

So first thing you do is make certain people notice you. That you do by questioning the protection given to politicians. For example, Mr. Geert Wilders, who is under permanent police protection for innumerable death threats: you order him to your office, and tell him to shut the f**k up. If he keeps his trap shut, those Muslims wouldn’t be such a nuisance to him. You realize very well this will not sit right, but that doesn’t matter. You are noticed. You are in the news, for at least a full month. Journalists interview you. Your first goal is achieved. The country knows the NCTB agency exists. Growing teeth on a toothless agency is your next priority.

Now you can start working in earnest. And that is what you do. You commission a scientific research by (of course a left-wing) independent university about Salafism. The Catholic University of Nijmegen (KUN) is regrettably far too left-wing to be taken seriously. This university is nicknamed “The university of Saint Marx”, located in “Havana on the Waal River”. That won’t do. Scientific research from that university would make you laughingstock of the nation. So you go for second best: the University of Amsterdam. It is exactly as biased as the other one, but the general public doesn’t really know that.

Now, the Netherlands already has a secret service: the Algemene Inlichtingen en Veiligheidsdienst (AIVD). Every police department has at least two at their disposal: the recherche (plain clothes police) and the CID (Criminal Intelligence Department). These agencies work with dedicated undercover staff, which is what you don’t have. All you have are pencil pushers. Those agencies, notably the AIVD, already investigated Salafism. Their report is backed up with evidence from undercover agents, and a whole lot more. It isn’t what you want. They want to combat Salafism. You want an independent secret service, so this will get you nowhere. Don’t let facts interfere with your goal.

Your investigation will be done by the anthropological department of the university. In other words, the people who go to Papua New Guinea to find out about the life of recently discovered tribes. They observe customs and habits, ask questions, and write down answers. Which is the way anthropologists work, and what they will no doubt do here as well. Visit a few mosques. Ask questions. Write down the answers. There isn’t much undercover work here. Anthropologists don’t do cloak and dagger stuff.

Your friendly Salafist
Your friendly Salafist from our staunch ally Saudi Arabia. Peace be with you all!

Does it worry you? Not in the slightest. There isn’t a problem with Muslims, and certainly not with Salafists. The word itself means ‘brothers’. What could be more peace-loving than a bunch of guys calling themselves brothers? (A group of guys calling themselves ‘comrades’, perhaps?)You know you are right, mainly because anyone who doesn’t gets kicked out of the way, fired, or warned off. Also because the few that might disagree with you would never be so rash as to voice it in your face. So you are right. You already told Geert Wilders he should tune down. Now it’s time the nation learns that lesson as well.

The main purpose is, of course, to set a basis for your own undercover team. A university can only do an anthropological investigation. It will take time; this project will take at least a year. But time is on your side. You were the youngest Secretary General in the history of The Netherlands (and probably the worst), a year or two doesn’t matter a lot to you. The outcome is already known, as you want no real investigation. You never had one in your life, anyway. An investigation is done merely to underline your opinion with some convenient facts. And so it is with this one. The outcome will therefore be what you want: while Muslims aren’t a threat to the nation (you said that many times in public), Islamophobes certainly are (you said that too). They need to be investigated and kept under control, and you are the man to handle that.

Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky

Give it two years and you can hang your picture next to Iron Felix!

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Tjibbe Joustra
Tjibbe Joustra (background caption: “Do you see something suspicious? Tell us”)

From a news report:

Chairman Tjibbe Joustra of the UWV unemployment institute got into hot water in 2003 when the RTL news program Edition showed illegally-made videos of the UWV head office. Brand new toilets where hacked away, and very expensive materials such as cherry-wood and hand carved stones created an outcry in times of nationwide budget cuts. Parliament asked minister de Geus for an explanation in June 2003 why this new office had to be entirely renovated. De Geus, who based his reply on information from the board of trusties of UWV, said there wasn’t anything irregular here. However, on 14 February 2004 he demanded the resignation of Mr. Joustra, as he had given him incomplete and incorrect information.

From the commission investigating Mr. Tjibbe Joustra as Secretary General for Agriculture:

The commission strongly criticized the top of the ministry: the work method was often highly inefficient, rough, and top-down. The ministry was controlled autocratically, employed intimidation, and far too much power was in hands of a very small group of civil servants, more specifically, in hands of the Secretary General T. Joustra. As all ministers left management completely in hands of the organization of the Secretary General and his staff departments cannot be spoken of open or even of efficient management under his term as S.G. According to the commission Kroes. “ A vertical information barrier existed. The top of the ministry closed itself to the public. Fear for making mistakes leads to self censorship and lack of initiative in the lower echelons of the ministry. The commission recommends the resignation of Mr. Joustra.

When Black Friday Comes

The Neo-Nazi Cabal

The above photo was recovered from an archive through the dedicated sleuthing of a Gates of Vienna operative. In it you can see (L to R) Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, and Jimmy Carter. You can also see that the four men are smiling, enjoying themselves, and even sharing a toast.

Take note: Former President Jimmy Carter can be seen sharing a white power moment with three extreme-right American Nationalists.

Mr. Carter is associated here with the racist Ronald Reagan, and — even more significantly — with the paleo-Nazi Richard Nixon, the Lord of the Underworld, the Prince of Darkness, SATAN HIMSELF!

I have no definitive information about what Jimmy Carter was doing there with those other men, but his presence in the photo certainly raises questions which need to be answered. Otherwise, Mr. Carter risks damaging the Democrat Party and the entire trans-national progressive movement.

I don’t know about you, but I’m going to be leery in the future of supporting Cynthia McKinney, Michael Moore, Hugo Chavez, and even Fidel Castro. All of these people would be well advised to disavow any association with such a questionable figure.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The ongoing hostility towards the Center for Vigilant Freedom was renewed last night in another Little Green Footballs post, this one directing its fire at the country report on Belgium given at Counterjihad Brussels 2007 by Filip Dewinter of Vlaams Belang.

The report itself was a concise and useful summary of the grave crisis that Belgium faces from a massive influx of unassimilated Muslim immigrants. An excerpt:

In Brussels more than one fifth of the municipal councillors are now immigrants of non-European origin. Most of them are Muslims, and most of them have been elected as Socialists, though many have also been welcomed as Christian-Democrat trade unionists on the lists of the Christian-Democrat Party.

But, if one believes the accusations hurled at Mr. Dewinter, the taint of his associations invalidates his message and precludes us from paying attention to it.

The LGF post went on to recycle the same old accusations against Dewinter, including the ludicrous funeral photo, in which Mr. Dewinter attended a funeral which Jean-Marie Le Pen also attended.

Which reminds me — I remember seeing Jimmy Carter standing next to George H. W. Bush at Richard Nixon’s funeral!

Case closed.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

A reader tipped me to the LGF post, so this morning, for the first time in weeks, I actually read an LGF comment thread. I noticed at least three commenters in open rebellion against the lizardoid party line, with the leader very much in evidence commenting against them and throwing contemptuous insults in their direction.

It reminded me of a group of hobbits holding fast in defiance against the Nazgûl.

Concerning the issue of Vlaams Belang, the three commenters — Jeppo, Blogagog, and EtNorskTroll — said it better than I can, so I will simply quote excerpts below:

From Jeppo:
– – – – – – – –

You have to remember that Dewinter was just one delegate among the 80 or so from more than a dozen European countries plus the US, Canada and Israel at the Counterjihad Summit. Just to list some of the anti-jihadist worthies in attendance: Bat Ye’or, Spencer, Bostom, Eldad, Littman, Sookhdeo, Fjordman, Ekeroth, Geller, Bodissey, Kepiblanc, Conservative Swede, etc. This conference was also supported by mainstream US conservatives like Diana West and Richard Miniter. This was not in any way, shape or form a fascist-friendly event.

…LGF should be one of the worldwide leaders of this movement, not self-marginalized because of disagreements with only one of its members.


This split has left LGF and few others on one side, and virtually the entire anti-jihadist movement on the other. The VB and SD along with several other similar European political parties will continue to grow as Europe continues to Islamize. Most conservatives recognize this and welcome it. The ones who don’t will gradually become irrelevant. The Vlaams Belang are your allies whether you like it or not.


It’s not about you or me supporting the VB, it’s about the 800,000 (and growing fast) Flemings who do. It is them, not us, who are pro actively standing up against the Islamic immigration invasion of their country. This is why they are applauded by serious anti-jihadists everywhere. Hopefully one day soon the artificial and corrupt nation of Belgium will split up, and an independent Flanders will have a VB government that will stop Muslim immigration once and for all. Maybe you will disapprove of this. I won’t.

From Blogagog:

I’m not a white nationalist, and I support Israel pretty much as strongly as I support America (well, close). But you are really misrepresenting potential allies against islamofascism, and I think I’ve seen enough.

LGF, once a uniting force of all who support an end to islamic supremacism, jihadism, and terrorism, is developing a 1984 attitude. Frankly, I’m creeped out.

You will no doubt ban me for saying this (I’ve seen examples of bannings for lesser slights) but STOP DIVIDING THE GOOD GUYS! Is it wrong to be a fan of the Democrats since Robert Byrd was in the KKK? Of course not. He grew, and got over that. It IS wrong to support the Democrats, but for entirely different reasons.

So why is it wrong to support VB if some of its members were scumbags in the past? EVERY political movement has scumbags in its past. As an American, I support the Flemish as much as I support the Israelis. Danes, Swedes, likewise.

From EtNorskTroll:

I was trying to stick up for sense and reason. This schism benefits no one except the Jihadis….and that angers me to no end.


Even as there is no racially pure group, there is also no politically pure group, ‘multi culturally thinking’ or otherwise. Life is all about compromise. Adults know this. It is only children who are allowed the luxury of indulging in absolutes.

Charles Johnson has made an encouraging gesture by allowing these comments to remain on the thread and by not banning the commenters. His magnanimity gives me hope that the current unpleasantness is in the process of winding down.