The Five Choices

Sweden — The Partition of India

Update from the Baron:I was using Dymphna’s computer, and forgot to log in as the Baron before posting. But this really is one of my posts.

Ten years ago, El Inglés wrote his ground-breaking essay about the dilemma that Western Europe is currently facing, “Surrender, Genocide… or What?”. It made heads explode even among certain of our supposedly “conservative” allies.

Last week we discussed partition, which is a third option.

Now our long-time commenter RonaldB has added two more options in remarks about the fall of Uppsala. He was specifically addressing the situation in Sweden, but his descriptions are equally applicable to all of Western Europe and the UK, with Canada and Australia moving along right behind them. Even the USA will face the same dilemma, at least in some of our major metropolitan areas, within fifteen or twenty years, so this is something we should all be thinking about carefully.

Option #5 is “Genocide”, but I would assume it includes ethnic cleansing, which might be called “Genocide Lite”.

Remember: The most important thing about these options is not whether one or another of them is the one you prefer. There are two important questions to consider (besides the morality of the chosen solution):

1.   Is the choice politically possible? For instance, I often hear statements to the effect that “All seditious Muslims must be immediately deported, all the mosques must be closed, and all the globalist elite traitors must be tried and executed.” OK, I hear the suggestion. But it is not politically possible, neither now nor for the foreseeable future. So why bother discussing it?
2.   Is the choice viable? That is, even if it is politically possible, would it work? Can it accomplish its goals, or is it almost certain to fail? It’s my contention that partition might be just barely possible in political terms (after all, it was implemented in India in 1947), but it is not viable — it would fail, and fail quickly. Western Europe and India are very different cases.

Dymphna and I will shortly be going out for a little while. Y’all can start the discussion, and when we get back, we’ll moderate the comments.

Here’s what RonaldB had to say:

1.   Surrender
    This is indistinguishable from what they’re doing now. Withdraw the police, allow sharia law, sharia enforcement police, sharia courts to do as they wish, and continue sending in welfare and public assistance, including housing and medical care, for any Muslim from the area who applies for it.
2.   Partition
    Build a wall or impenetrable fence around the area, move any Muslims or immigrants in the surrounding area into the partitioned territory, and leave it alone. The main difference between this and surrender is that people from inside the area will not be allowed into Sweden, and no assistance will be given. They can apply to the EU, Saudi Arabia, or anyone else who wants to give them money. Whether they starve will no longer be a concern.
3.   Mass expulsions
    This will take some real planning, as a place must be found to expel the immigrants to. The Israelis had the right idea: pay a head tax to some local despot for every head he accepts, and don’t concern yourself too much with what happens to them after they get there.
4.   A horrific crackdown, completely discarding individual rights
    A simple military movement will not have much effect, because the organized Muslims can simply assassinate anyone who gets in their way. You would have to have a security apparatus akin to Saddam Hussein’s secret police, or Savak or the British Tans who controlled Ireland. The city would be treated as occupied territory. Unfortunately, the welfare and aid would probably continue under this scenario.
5.   Genocide
    There are so many other ways of handling this that genocide would be profoundly immoral.
    Those are all the possibilities I can think of. I don’t think there is a possibility of putting a lid on the situation and pretending it’s been settled. The Muslims feel its time to assert their control, so they’re now in the last stages of jihad and aren’t about to pull back for bribes or appeals to reason or civic pride.

76 thoughts on “The Five Choices

  1. Close the borders and throw them out. It’s either that or have a civil war. The longer Europe waits, the more radical will be the solution.

  2. It is my opinion that none of the options on the list are politically possible at present except for surrender, which seems to be the default across Western Europe. Other options will become politically as muslim atrocities increase. When or how this will happen is impossible to predict except that I can say it is an absolute certainty that it will. A successful chemical or biological toxin attack that kills thousands would certainly change the dynamics of what is politically possible.

    Of the options on the list, I think only two of them are truly viable for long term stability. Either western europe surrenders completely to islam and becomes another islamic hellhole, or circumstances and changing mood of native populations to provocations and atrocities allow them to unapologetically fight back and expel and or exterminate all muslims to be found in western lands. Any other attempted option just delays the inevitable day of reckoning between the choices of surrender or genocide. Even India and Israel, those examples of partition, are only marking time before either surrender or war to the death will be necessary. History is full of examples of surrender or genocide, so precedent appears to be between both options. There is no precedent for islam to peacefully coexist with non-muslims.

    • I do agree with that assessment, but I think it is going to come sooner rather than later.

    • “A successful chemical or biological toxin attack that kills thousands would certainly change the dynamics of what is politically possible.” How about a pandemic? Ebola, which is neither controllable nor preventable, despite the WHO & the CDC blabbing otherwise, is lose once again in Africa. What has saved us -so far- is that the people dying with it haven’t found their way to an airport. But, since you can have Ebola and show no symptoms other than for the flu, I’m thinking any do-gooder, religious person(s), tourist, or Diversity Enricher is just a plane ride away from bringing this disease to any Western Nation. (Remember Dallas? CLOSED a major hospital, and left 2 nurses in danger for a lifetime.) This or a similar scenario, is what I see kicking off the festivites. We had better harden our hearts, because some difficult decisions need to be made.

      • Not likely to have much effect on western european politics if ebola spreads to culturally enriched nations. The ruling elites would just explain it away as being an unfortunate side effect of living in Europe, and something that just happens occasionally for no discernable reason, like vomit from a drunkard. And anyone who dared to question the source of such a plague and the reasons for its spread would be de-platformed, and intimidated or law-fared into silence.

        An attack on thousands with something like ricin or phosgene gas however, would not be able to be hidden or explained away as a random and unpreventable occurrence. The political consequences in that case would be far more severe and paradigm-changing than an ebola outbreak.

        • “An attack on thousands with something like ricin or phosgene gas however, would not be able to be hidden or explained away as a random and unpreventable occurrence. The political consequences in that case would be far more severe and paradigm-changing than an ebola outbreak.”

          This is why something like this is *probably* not going to happen. They already have a winning strategy in the long-term; another mass attack like this could potentially derail their strategy and erase some of the gains they’ve made.

      • Considering there’s an be la outbreak in Africa again at present, I imagine this may be an opportune time for the “elite” to transport the infected into western Europe. Not be alarmist, and I won’t tell anyone “I told you so” if it does happen.

    • “Other options will become politically possible as muslim atrocities increase”

      Agreed. Little point in discussing what options are politically possible and viable now. Only slow motion surrender is politically possible at the moment but that is only viable in the long term if the population of Europe have been as enfeebled as they sometimes appear. More likely a pushback at some point and outright conflict.

      After another 5 years of increasing mayhem, and possibly some “spectaculars”, then other options may become both politically possible and viable.

      My money is on civil war or something like it with several parties – Muslims, Kaffirs, leftists, the state, external actors involved in a kaleidoscope of alliances. I hope though at some point on the descent into that catastrophe the electorate and therefore the government will proscribe central elements of Islamic ideology and intern or expel those who cross the line. This would be #3 mass expulsions but we will not find out just how mass they will have to be until it’s tried. Perhaps with the most hardline ideologues gone a genuine Islam lite we can live with will appear or perhaps it won’t!

    • Intense, unrelenting promotion of the values of the West with the goal of creating apostates.

      It’s free. It doesn’t cost anything and could be admixed with any of the other options.

  3. So we understand correctly

    He was specifically addressing the situation in Sweden, but his descriptions are equally applicable to all of Western Europe and the UK, with Canada and Australia moving along right behind them. Even the USA will face the same dilemma...

    The USA has the advantage in both demographics as well as Constitutional Law. Islam is politically seditious – more so, than it is religious. The first amendment makes no allowances for sedition.

    Is the choice politically possible?
    If The Constitution of The United States of America withstands progressive assault – then yes, some of those options will remain politically and legally possible.

    • America is in trouble. It is effectively acceptable to pull down war memorials if the narrative fits. How long until the Confederate monuments are joined by monuments of those involved in displacing native Indians, in fighting the Mexicans to take Texas?
      It’s not like Unionists were openly friendly to black people or Chinese so there is scope to bulldoze a huge chunk of America’s founding history and identity, particularly as the population changes.
      Then you get to that level like in the UK where town halls have the portraits of former mayors removed from the portrait gallery simply because they’re all white men.

      Now the last war memorial pulled down will likely be erected again and some of the ringleaders charged. That doesn’t change the part where a mob did this unchallenged and with very little negative commentary in the media. This is just testing the waters, more will come as demographics shift and the effects of far left education in school play out as those young people enter university or the workforce with a skewed version of history and their own identity.

      • Absolutely spot on analysis of America! And thanks to NGOs and do good, religious organizations – the majority of Muslims and economic migrants are dispersed throughout the entire United States, not sequestered in migrant centers. I fully expect the 5000+ indigenous citizens of Chemnitz to storm their local migrant centers and burn them completely down. When you live in a tight knit village or town center (platz) it’s easier to identify & punish the troublemakers.

      • Can those of us on “the right” start pulling down leftist monuments? Ingest threnody a statue of Lenin somewhere, and I won’t be surprised if a Karl Marx is somewhere as well

  4. No need to discuss it only academically when we have practical examples in near past. Before 1991. and breakup of Yugoslavia, Serbs constituted 12.2% of Croatian population. In 1995. their number fell to 2%. Needless to say, those 4 years were a nasty mess. Options 2, 3 and 4 were used – Serbs were expulsed from urban areas (where they were in minority) and their individual rights were violated in many ways (including wanton murders). In some rural areas (where they were in majority), Serbs formed so called “SAO Krajina”, an autonomous region which declared independence from Croatia, followed by a lot of strife and violence. In 1995, SAO Krajina was crushed in Operation Storm (large-scale military operation by Croatian army). Again, 90% of Serbs were expulsed and many who stayed were murdered. I don’t condone those crimes, just outlining it here for you, to know what to expect in worst case scenario.

    Bear in mind however that SAO Krajina was heavily armed (with tanks, artillery and aircraft obtained from the Federal Yugoslav army and Serbia).

  5. Financial assisted repatriation to their ancestral homelands, those from which they claim descent and whose culture they wish to impose-is the only humane solution in the short-term. Large financial inducements to return to the Islamic countries of origin where they can enjoy the delights of Sharia Law are only answer

    • “financial inducements” should begin with the cancellation of “social benefits” leading to landlord evictions, then promises of payments when arriving in the homeland. Betcha women and children take advantage of this…[redacted for violence – not on this website]

  6. End welfare for foreigners and for the children of foreigners. Extend that restriction to the third generation if the second generation is a long term welfare recipient. If you have to rely on government benefits a generation later then you don’t need to be there. That would resolve the vast majority of the problem. Most of these immigrants have close ties with their homelands so once the free stuff stops they’ll leave.

    Denmark saved itself hundreds of millions a year just tweaking a couple of laws relating to marriage as moslems left for Sweden and the UK. Which also is a good example of how immigration will not help pay for pensions when these people suck out of the economy far more than they put in.

  7. Lawrence Auster’s Separationism is, in my mind, the only long-term and humane response — for any Western nation.

    It may not seem politically possible in this year of our Lord, 2018. But the Marxist globalists are falling like dominoes everywhere the in-your-face obscenity of government-imposed subordinating of the lives and will of the nations’ people to OBVIOUS invaders boils over. Invaders, who play every bit the role of soulless, vicious conquerors as have their Muslim forbears — They hate us and wish us gone!

    We love them — and wish them BEGONE. Calculate the expense of having hundreds of thousands of hostiles on your soil and remit to them personally and to their own native homelands a bribe to make them leave. Inform them that since these invaders have made clear their contempt for Western values, they are NOT welcome.

    Mosques must be closed. Let them riot — they already do.
    Mark them for deportation. Do it.

    • Humanely returning economic invaders is only possible if the political will is present, funds to pay bribes to get the invaders to voluntarily leave are available, and countries who were more than happy to see their not-so-best and brightest leave to invade the West accept their return.

      I believe that by the time real political will and the desire amongst a majority of the native western population exists to deport, the level of animosity which must exist as a prerequisite to such a drastic change in mood and political direction among ethnic europeans will overtake attempts at peacefully managing the deportation of unwilling invaders. By the time that the situation is sufficiently dire that even the placid native european herds recognize the need for drastic action, lack of economic stability, crippling jihadist attacks and acts of retribution by europeans will ensure funds are not available to get invaders to voluntarily leave, or persuade African despots to grant permission to repatriate their troublemakers.

      • Well, that’s bleak!

        So, they have a choice: 1) Continue to pay — as they will be made to do — for the privilege of being pillaged, raped, and mudered by foreign hostiles or 2) empty the piggy bank and get the rampagers out of their country for good.

        Not a hard choice, in my opinion.

  8. Make Islam a prohibited religion
    Close mosques
    Cut financial support
    Force repatriation by offering death the alternative option

    • None of those are yet politically possible. But we are only a high profile attack or two away with mass casualties on the scale of 9-11 before the Overton Window will have moved enough to allow such drastic measures.

      What do you think the likely response of the worldwide ummah would be to such ultimatums on its soldiers preparing Europe to join the caliphate?

      • I think Lebanon is the model for the future of Western Europe. Terror, escalating to civil war scale. Local Moslems armed with heavy weapons supplied by Middle East governments and finally Christian capitulation. No other outcome is possible. Europe made its bed and it will get to lie in it.

        • You are correct, in my opinion, regarding terror leading to escalation to civil war. However, my understanding of the Lebanese civil war was that initially the muslim and christian factions were approximately equal in population size, and the influx of Palistinian refugees tipped the balance to the side of muslims. Also, there were numerous factions among both Christians and muslims, as well as outside actors supporting their favorite horses with money, weapons, and training.

          Here, the similarities break down; muslims in western europe are nowhere the majority of the population or close to being majorities. Locally, in many cities they have population majorities, but without continued access to food, water, energy, and weapons during a conflict or civil war it is also irrelevent. A large population of non-combatant women and children becomes a liability instead of an advantage in such a scenario. Lastly, muslims do not have enough land area anywhere in western europe to be a viable state or support themselves through agriculture or manufacturing and exporting. The muslim role in Europe is more that of a parasite and invader, and their survival in Europe to date had more to do with the patience and forced toleration by Europeans and the perfidy of the elite ruling classes than any actual positive contributions that they make to European society.

          A major factor in the Lebanese civil war being so nasty was that it was a proxy war for Cold War and Arab, Israeli, Sunni, and Shia factions; none of this exists in Europe. Elites might work behind the scenes to import more savages, but I do not believe they are also working to arm them. Also, the political elites would not have the means or the desire to import the numbers of small arms, ammunition, explosives, shoulder fired weapons such as RPGs, and IED components that would allow poorly trained African scavengers to fight to a standstill modern armies; even European ones… If the elites are unwilling or unable to do this, then the chance is slim to none of them supplying the invaders with real hardware like crew-served weaponry or tanks, and the logistics, training, and spares and munitions to effectively use them.

          The worst danger to Europe as I see it, is lack of will to fight to defend themselves and their society from the invaders. But that can change pretty rapidly, since the history of Europe is an extremely violent one, and those genetic characteristics are still there; just dormant and suppressed by several generations of multiculti and leftist indoctrination.

          • I agree with most of your analysis. Permit me to quibble on one point:
            A major factor in the Lebanese civil war being so nasty was that it was a proxy war for Cold War and Arab, Israeli, Sunni, and Shia factions; none of this exists in Europe.

            Lebanon was a proxy war between Israel and Syria. Cold war – less so.

            But this will be true for Europe as well. Kurds and Turks will fight in Germany. Sunnis will be backed by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan; Shias by Iran. If, to pick a random example, Belgium starts disintegrating, then France will move in to protect Walloons, Holland will send its army into Flanders. Jihadis from all over the world will arrive to support the Umma, just as they did in Syria and Afghanistan. It won’t be any different than Lebanon.

        • I think that you are closer to the truth. We have (in general ) forgotten how to fight. Even though most Europeans know they are delivering their young to Hell on Earth.

  9. Here is the beginning of my RICO-M3 proposal. (See link below.)

    American RICO statutes (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) were intended to go after the mafia. The acts of Islamic mullahs and jihadis clearly falls into the same pattern as the mafia. The only difference being, Islam’s claim of an oddball form of “religious legitimacy”.

    The US should use the RICO statutes to, declare Islam, a criminal enterprise. Then close Islam down as it presently exists in the US.

    RICO allows the government to follow crime and money. Then, arrest all, and confiscate anything in its path.

    You can be sure the movement of money for jihad is widespread. You can be sure the incitement and communication between mullahs and mosques is widespread. You can also be sure there is foreign involvement. The RICO statutes were made just for this type of activity.

    Use a small army of CPAs and attorneys to investigate every jihad attack. Follow 100% of the money back to its source. Track anyone involved, in any way. Then use the RICO statutes to jail, confiscated, and shut down all involved. That includes:

    M1 – Shutting down mosques involved in any jihad attack.
    M2 – Arrest mullahs involved.
    M3 – Follow, and confiscate, all jihad money back to its source.


    This proposal may not bring about an immediate collapse of Islam. But, Islam as it exists today cannot exist without mullahs and mosques. And nationalizing 100% of Islamic money in the Western banking system will send massive shock waves through Islamic countries.

    Without mosques and mullahs, muslims would be free to read Quranic scripture in the privacy of their homes . But preaching would strictly controlled. Anyone caught preaching violence should be tried for crimes against humanity.

    Within a short span of time Islam as we know it would fall apart.

    Readers can read my thesis on what Islam is right here at GOV here is a link.

    I have spent considerable time trying to figure how to undo the islamic cult. I have lots of additional ideas. I request anyone with ideas to email me at

    • Bob, As much as I admire your thought process in fighting islam in a lawyerly way. There is a problem with your civilized way of doing things. We are at war, we just don’t know it yet. You can’t fight wars with lawfare, you must get your hands dirty with warfare.

    • The Saudi’s won’t allow any of that to happen. And all they have to do is call in their favors. There are enough pols on the Saudi payroll to never let this happen.

      There’s a good chance even Trump owes the Saudis something by now.

      Other than that, your ideas are good. Anything to get rid of all musl[im]s would be good.

    • I like it.

      Alternatively, nuking Mecca and Medina will cause the collapse of Islam. What are they going to pray to, radioactive ashes? 😉

      • This was a very lively topic of discussion here a year ago or so. I am not so sure anymore about it ending islam; at least not in the sense that many think regarding collapse of religious faith by muslims. After all, if someone were to nuke the Vatican or Jerusalem would it cause christianity to collapse?

        However, such an attack would be the beginning of a fight to the death between the West and Islam, in which Islam would certainly lose. There would be no quarter asked or given by muslims, and reprisals would certainly see western cities nuked and gassed before we crushed them. I am grateful that muslims are still a minority of the population worldwide, and that they only have a handful of nukes available to them.

        • After all, if someone were to nuke the Vatican or Jerusalem would it cause christianity to collapse?

          I’m not advocating nukes.

          But Islam has a supremacist element in it. For believers, the truth of Islam is proven by the earthly supremacy of Islam.
          It would be much more affected by such a display of power than other religions. Judaism has already survived destruction and exile twice. Protestant Christianity has already disconnected itself from Rome.

  10. Re: ” Is the choice politically possible?”

    There is an important asymmetry not discussed in the article – the Muslims amongst us believe themselves to be at war and are acting accordingly, whereas the West and most of its peoples are oblivious to the fact we’re at war and are acting accordingly.
    To paraphrase the old Leon Trotsky quote, “You may not be interested in war (read “jihad”), but war is interested in you.”

    Islam is not merely a religion, but a totalitarian political system and a highly-effective means of conquest – both of which are disguised or hide within Islam’s religious component. Because Islam “is” a religion, it has – thus far – received the protections afforded religions in pluralistic western nations. Thus protected, Islam’s political and military components have taken root, grown, and thrived.

    The West and its peoples, if they are to survive, must break through this cognitive fog and see reality for what it is – and begin treating this as the war that it is.

    There is another aspect to the problem not mentioned in the article: the western ruling class, or at least a substantial portion of it in Europe and elsewhere, are aiding and abetting the Muslims in their takeover of Europe and other places. British Prime Minister May, French President Macron, EU President Juncker, German Chancellor Merkel – these and other collaborators are 21st-centuery Quislings and must be identified as such.

    As Matt Bracken has written and stated, the current demographic transformation of Europe and the West now underway has been planned and executed with all of the care and careful diligence that went into planning the June 1944 Invasion of Normandy. Although this great population replacement-cum-conquest has ben carefully designed to look spontaneous, it is anything but.

    Not only are the soldiers of Allah at war with the West, so are many of its own leaders!

    • Georgiaboy, You have been the first to make the point that it is very clear that the Western political and media elite have clearly sided with Muslims, and it will only be when those individuals are personally impacted, either at the ballot box or by other means, will they start to concern themselves with the impact that Muslim criminality is having on poor innocent Tommy, Jean Paul or Helga. These political and media individuals need to be targeted, identified and pressure applied. Alinsky works both ways.

      • I am convinced that the elites who have allowed such terrible Islamic savagery to occur on the respective watches – grooming gangs, massive numbers of assaults, gang rapes, sexual slavery, fire-bombings, beheadings and other acts of jihad – are vulnerable from the standpoint of legitimacy.

        Colloquially, we speak of “the mandate of heaven,” when what we really mean is the consent of the governed to be governed. A government which loses its legitimacy ricks having the consent of the people withdrawn – and history shows us that such governments usually do not stand for long.

        Under the paradigm of the nation-state, the most-vital, the most-sacred duty of a national leader is the protection of the nation and people that politician is charged with leading. Present-day European political leaders such as Merkel, May, Macron, and Juncker have already betrayed that trust. How long before the consent of the people is withdrawn and these leaders and their respective governments lose their legitimacy in the eyes of the people?

  11. I believe the US has an advantage over Europe in that it has a substantial non-white population that is not Muslim. These people can violently resist Islamification without having to worry about attacks from their own leaders because “racist!” doesn’t work on them.

    I also expect Britain’s Sikh community to be prominant in any future resistance for the same reason.

    • Don’t expect anything from the Sikhs…they suck up to the government as they want the same special treatment Muslims get, and therefore are also adherents to ‘community relations’, the ‘multi cultural society’ etc etc. Religious Sikhs are now all turning vegetarian/vegan, so the mental and physical will to fight (which our ancestors had in abundance) is fading away fast. I am from a Sikh family in UK.

  12. @ Bob Smith

    Re: “American RICO statutes (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) were intended to go after the mafia.”

    In principle, your idea has much to recommend it. However, there are some very real difficulties to putting your idea into action.

    Islamic interests and money are now so thoroughly intertwined with the U.S. government, banking system and economy that decoupling them will be a major undertaking.

    It is acknowledged by many specialists in the counter-jihad field that Saudi Arabia is at the epicenter of the conflict between Islam and the West. Saudi Arabia is the birthplace of Islam, and home to its two most-holy cities, Mecca and Medina.

    The dominant sect within Islam, the Sunnis, trace their origins to ancient Arabia, what is today Saudi Arabia. The most-virulent and intolerant strains of Sunni Islam, such as Wahhabism, emanate from Saudi Arabia – in particular from the Saudi royal family and their peers in the other Sunni Arab nations.

    The Sunni Arabs, spearheaded by the Saudis, are the chief drivers of the great jihad being waged against the West, including the so-called “civilization jihad” of the Muslim Brothers. The Ikhwan, as they are known, are now found in chapters all over the Islamic world, but the group originated in Egypt, a Sunni-dominated nation.

    The Saudis and their equally-wealthy fellow Sunni Arabs of the gulf oil states also supply the vast majority of the funding for the civilization jihad – it is their wealth – their petrodollars – which fund the construction of mosques, Islamic community centers, Muslim schools (madrasas), and much more, around the world, including in the U.S.

    The Saudis literally have us over a barrel in that we belong to the petrodollar agreement, whereby in return for doing OPEC’s business only in U.S. dollars, we – the United States – agree to protect the Saudis and their Arab brethren from all threats, whether internal or external. If we – a given president, for example – refuse to play ball and jump when the Saudi king says jump – then they simply have to threaten to end the petrodollar agreement and – Viola! – problem solved. Another U.S. chief executive brought to heel.

    If threatening to end the petrodollar isn’t enough, the sheiks can always threaten to pull the plug on all of the money they launder through the U.S. banking system and loan to the government via purchases of T-Bills and other U.S. government debt instruments.

    A proposal of the kind you suggest would almost certain trigger upheaval between the U.S. and the Sunni Arabs, especially Saudi Arabia – which might end Arab support for the petrodollar and their provision of cheap credit to the federal government. If these were suddenly withdrawn, at least two things would happen – first, the dollar would collapse and overnight become worthless; second, the federal government would go bankrupt.

    Hypothetically, the President and/or Congress could act to freeze Arab assets in this country – but that still wouldn’t do the trick since the U.S. government, like a drug addict who needs a fix, is hooked on borrowing money from the Saudis and their pals.

    Leaving aside the above for a moment, there is another set of problems. Even if the Saudi support for the petrodollar and loans to the U.S. weren’t a factor, using RICO would frighten and greatly alarm politicians, bureaucrats, and other government functionaries and employees than we can probably imagine. Why? Because the Arabs – giving the devil his due – have been lavishly-astute in bribing just about everyone, or otherwise assuring their loyalty via financial support.

    That army of accountants and lawyers of which you spoke would quickly uncover dirt not only on the imams, mosques and those who fund them, but a substantial portion of the political class in this country. The Clintons and the Clinton Foundation being only the tip of that iceberg.

    I’m not bringing these things up to suggest that your idea is without merit; it isn’t – but simply to note that there are practical challenges which will have to be addressed and solved if your plan is to work.

    • Great observations.

      The fact is, any country living beyond its means on borrowing is sacrificing its independence. The Saudis and Chinese hold massive US debt obligations, and use it to buy companies, educational institutions, and communications media. This is akin to selling your refrigerator and stove to finance a trip to Las Vegas.

      It’s true that corrupt politicians like the Clintons are available to the highest bidder…or more accurately, to all bidders. But individual corruption is not so much the problem as the built-in deficits, requiring ever more compliance with lenders.

      It’s certainly possible to prevent the Saudis from funding educational institutions, or foundations, or financing Mosques. The problem is, that would decrease the value of the treasury bonds and dollars to them, and they would stop buying US debt instruments. So, you get back to the basic principle the US has to wean itself off deficit spending before it can contemplate taking action against the financial networks of its creditors.

      I had to think for awhile to explain the fact that Trump is able to press the Chinese with tariffs. The best answer I could think of is that Trump’s constituents are the least dependent on government entitlements of any part of the electorate. The Democratic coalition of the fringes consists of almost all the people receiving entitlements.

      In summary, a government addicted to deficit spending absolutely cannot be independent enough to protect itself.

  13. This is part of a much larger agenda.

    I grew during the paradigm shift from a society based upon nominally Christian principles to the present society that is based upon secular principles. I went from First Grade being taught that all that is was created by God to Fourth Grade where I was taught that there is no god and that humans are the apex of the evolutionary process.

    Guess what filled the vacuum that the abandonment of the Christian ethos left, and with the endorsement by the powers that be. It was the collectivist model that enabled the management class to exercise the needed control of the masses so that societal stability could be maintained and profit growth be realized.

    In First Grade, I was taught that I was a special and unique creation and that I owed my Creator, the Lord God, a duty of holiness and the full development of the talents that He had given me. In Fourth Grade, I was taught that I was simply the result of a nameless and random evolutionary process and that the only value I would have would be the extent to which I successfully supported the group and its endeavours. There was, of course, no room for a Christian God, individuality, or personal responsibility, only the support of the group and the narrative and nothing else.

    The above comparison of these two ethos points out what is at the root of the problem that is apparently insoluble. The powers that be want the control of the masses so that the masses will serve their interests and needs.

    Individuality is sedition to them. The liberals wish to be free of a God who tells them how to live and what is required of them. The two groups find common ground in the destruction of the individual and the individual’s religion, namely Christianity. Various vehicles towards this goal have been tried. Marxist Socialism has worked very well in China because of its high context culture, but did not work very well in Russia and eventually imploded there.

    The replacement for Marxism and communism in the West was found to be Islam, especially as its group/tribal ethic is self-policing, and rather violently so. Thus Islam was turned loose as the proverbial rabid dog on the individual and the Christian to cow into submission and exterminate those who refused to submit.

    There really is no solution, only the opening of the gates to judgment. At the risk of being moderated for preaching, divine judgment as was foretold 1900 years ago is really the only viable solution that will properly reward everyone for their deeds, both good and evil, and leave a planet that is cleaned up and ready for a new beginning in righteousness and holiness, the only characteristics that show any promise of enduring for the long term.

    We stand at the precipice, the choice of good or evil is ours to make, and the time is now as events will wait for no one.

    Respectfully yours

    • “In First Grade, I was taught that I was a special and unique creation and that I owed my Creator, the Lord God, a duty of holiness…”

      ” Fourth Grade where I was taught that there is no god and that humans are the apex of the evolutionary process….”


      I would say that both teaching models you describe were miserable. The public schools have no business teaching religion, pro or con. That should be reserved for religious schooling. It’s true that public schooling is massive, obscenely expensive, and counter-productive, in the sense that they actually make their students less suited for functioning in society than they would be otherwise. So, I’m completely open to the idea that public schooling should be dismantled and people left with their own money to choose the schooling for their children.

      A very nice liberal lady came to my door the other day, and I gave her my opinion on public schools. She said “what about the disruptive ones who need special schooling?” After the conversation, it occurred to me I should have asked “are you advocating for education or universal babysitting?”

      As far as evolution, the more I read of scientific studies and research, the less wriggle room there is for people who deny that our present composition is the result of evolution. There are plenty of religious people who believe in evolution, so I leave it to them to develop a philosophy of compatibility between religion and the existence of evolution.

      Let me put it like this. We now have the knowledge to create a society of people who have religious values, who produce enough material goods to live a happy, comfortable life, and who will do what is necessary to protect themselves. Implementing this knowledge does not require going against religious values, but it does require flexibility and a new way of thinking.

      Refusing to accept new knowledge and act on it is the key to losing the war. The knowledge we need to use is as forbidden and as loathed by the mass media and liberal establishment as fundamental Christianity is. Isn’t that a clue we need to work together?

        • Thank you Dymphna. It did sound somewhat fishy to have a religious affirmation at a public school. For the record, though an atheist, I have read religious people who say that evolution is simply part of god’s order, and therefore does not contradict a belief in god.

          By the way, at the bottom of the Wiki article you cite, there are links to free copies of all the versions of the Baltimore Catechism.

          • Free copies? I can’t imagine using it now. Rote learning about why we’re here and where we’re headed doesn’t work in the long run…though it was useful back in the day.

            I liked my Middle Ages zeitgeist but I didn’t understand that’s what it was until I got to college. My Shakespeare professor described the “civilized” world as it existed in Shakespeare’s time and I was taken aback: what he was describing was *my* world view for my first twenty years of life. No doubt having a Dublin-born mother and spending five formative years – from the age of ~five to ten – in a Catholic “orphanage” contributed to that.

            Leaving behind the literal wasn’t hard…reading Cardinal Newman, C.S. Lewis, Chesterton, etc., gave me an adult grasp of what constituted Christian belief. Going on to major in moral philosophy was also decisive.

            The theory of evolution shouldn’t be a sticking point. Any well-educated person used to have to take an intro Physics course, and that ought to have settled it. The further down we drill into Matter, the weirder it gets. Our Creator (or whomever) certainly has a quarky quirky sense of humor. Reading quantum physics left me dizzy sometimes, but often laughing, too.

  14. I watched the videos from
    Chemnitz (Eastern Germany) the past two days. Deutschland Stasi Police have activated jammers to keep the “far right” *Nazis* from releasing live video streams.

    When I posted support of the indigenous citizens (so-called Nazis) and pointed out the hypocrisy, false narrative portrayed by one clown giving a Nazi salute – my comments were immediately deleted by Yahoo & NPR after being posted! In America! Seldom do my comments get posted on MSM websites anymore.

    This type of virtual signaling censorship is what globalist governments will and are implementing today! Indigenous citizens of Chemnitz would have to collectively storm the migrant centers and burn them to the ground to temporarily rid economic migrants from their overrun city. “Temporarily” is the operative word here! No doubt the migrant centers would be rebuilt or relocated within days! Something that might work better with less bloodshed is the Amish inspired, cultural shunning practice! Imagine if outraged citizens stopped communicating with all
    male, economic migrants. Refused to give them directions, sell them alcohol, answer their questions, allow them free phone charges and WiFi use, refuse to volunteer or clean the migrant centers, etc. Social shunning lets them know without the use of violence that they (and their misogynistic, ungrateful, demanding, superiority attitudes & behaviors) are no longer welcome nor tolerated by the folk people!

    If this does nothing to persuade the economic & Islamic migrants to go back home (to one of the 56 Muslim countries in the OIC), then civil war will be inevitable! Because decent folks will no longer tolerate the intolerable & unchangeable 7th century, barbaric beliefs & criminal activities!!!

    • Wow! is all I can say.

      The German constitution actually guarantees the absence of censorship, but the government video jammers are still in plain sight.

      The Germans are sensitive about their history of Naziism. I think they ought to embrace, as well, the White Rose, the resistance of the German military and intelligence, including Canaris, and the Schindlers, a bonafide, card-carrying member of the Nazi party. The German (and the US) Antifa are more than obviously the intellectual descendants of the street-fighting, violence-loving Nazis.

      I like your idea about shunning, with the qualification that shunning, to be effective, involves a close-knit community. The person shunned has no social or emotional support, and his reproduction prospects are nil. In a divided society, the shunned person simply focuses on those who do not recognize the shunning obligation.

      My pessimism for an orderly solution stems from two factors: one is the massively divided society, where even a strong opinion for survival barely gets 50% support of the electorate; the other factor is the “Deep State”, which is code for a massive, powerful, entrenched, publicly-supported bureaucracy of regulation and police powers which is largely impervious to election results. The larger and more powerful the bureaucracy, the less susceptible to the actual wishes of the electorate.

      Paradoxically, the bureaucracy is extraordinarily sensitive to identity politics, which goes outside the electoral process and makes its power known through direct contact and street-level publicity. The last thing bureaucrats want is to actually defend themselves, so they cater to whatever group (read child-raping, Muslim refugees) has personal influence with politicians.

  15. As an Indian, let me answer this so that friends in western Europe can understand their options better. Partiton of India was fudged and the first left wing government (lapdogs of british) did not go for population exchange even after a death toll of 1 million. Thus, we now have even more bigger problems to deal with. Now, we have lost 30% territory, which is a recognized Islamic state, has nukes and is constantly involved in a proxy war against us, using the local ‘peacefuls’. Thus, we have a very strong collaboration of ultra left, traitors and peacefuls against the native hindus. India is trying very very hard to move forward, to develop, but how exactly do we develop when we have 250 million peacefuls as burden on our economy and sucking the life blood of our nation? Crime and terror are rampant in India and only one religion is behind it. You dont get to hear all of it, bcoz international media doesnt cover this side of India. I live in the capital and today morning I got to know that hindus are fleeing certain areas of New Delhi (Sultanpuri & Brahampuri). This is happening right in the capital! There is no help from the government. You can imagine what happens in areas where the rule of law is absent. We have millions of no-go zones, yes, millions! Some are so dangerous, hindus completely avoid them, you wont even find one hindu there. We are getting closer towards a civil war each year. I seriously doubt if hindus would even survive to see 22nd century. My estimate is by 2040 India will fall into a nationwide brutal civil war and at the same time, Pakistan and China will launch a 2 front war against us.

    Its sad, but I think, no matter how hard patriots and nationalists try, we are not going to survive whats coming. All of this makes me very very depressed. To see my 10,000 year old hindu civilization slowly die under the effects of ‘peacefuls’ and religion of peace. We could have contributed a lot to the world, had we been just left alone. Last one thousand years of war against the religion of peace, followed by british occupation and followed by great secular experiment from Marxists has left us in a state of great weakness and decay.

    Friends, you dont have any other option. Partition is just buying time. There is only one answer to this problem and you know it in your heart. When a body gets cancer, doctor recommends chemotherapy. I hope you get the idea.

    • Clear as chemotherapy which save my life, literally! My understanding is Muslims began their conquest of India in the northern regions. Wherever the religion of pieces spreads so does violence, rape, crime, etc. Now the north is conquered, Islam spreads to the center of India. So the poor Hindus either remain or flee to the south. They should start sharpening their knives and purchase American made baseball bats. Ten thousand angry citizens become a force to be reckoned with. In the military, a command “at ease” is given when marching over a foot bridge. A few hundred people marching in unison can bring down an entire bridge because feet strike the bridge at exactly the same time. Imagine 10,000 people swarming around migrant centers demanding the occupants be taken away from their cities, and deported! Or this same group surrounding a mainstream media office building or Chancellor Merkel’s office in Berlin shouting for her removal. In these scenarios violence may break out but it’s not necessary. There is strengthen in numbers! India has a large population. They need another Ghandi to organize non-violent, non-cooperation sit-ins and protests!

    • Indeed. India was a leading light of civilization before the Islamic onslaught, the home of ancient Vedic and Buddhist culture. Today it is disparaged as a backwards nation, but it only went back once Islam arrived. I think the entrenched caste system is not a result of adherence to Hinduism, but more as a way of protection against forced conversions. It has never been a peaceful society with Islam present, and this is the way Europe is heading. Muslims and non-muslims may live side by side, but in the presence of constant violence, economic and cultural regression, and more limited integration between communities, perhaps the formalisation of endogamy.

    • Indian Man,

      Thanks very much for your observations.

      This is counter to your conclusions, but I think one thing experience shows is that if you partition, do it completely. The Muslims should have been completely moved out of India. The Hindus in Pakistan who were silly enough to believe the guarantees of Al-Jinnah that the government of Pakistan would be secular and Hindus would be treated fairly…these Hindus are no threat to Pakistan, but they are subject to persecution and violence.

      One thing to realize is that in a conflict, particularly a civil war, individual justice cannot be maintained. In a complete removal of Muslim, for example, you will without doubt have individual Muslims who are peaceful and perhaps even actively supportive of the non-Muslim government, including measures targeted against Muslim subversion. Once it gets to the level of physical conflict, individual justice become secondary. Of course there is an empirical brake on abuses: Albert Speer, Hitler’s favorite architect, noted that the Russian territories first occupied by the Nazis welcomed the Nazis as liberators from the Communists. But, the Nazis themselves acted so brutally, the population turned against them and guerrilla terrorism became rampant.

      Even from your posting, one can think that if the partition of India had been complete, no Muslims left in Hindu India, the other problems, an aggressive Pakistan, could be managed. China may have an interest in dominating India, or poaching some Indian territory, but I can’t imagine China wants India as a conquered territory. Bye-bye ethnic China if they do.

      This also seems to say, once you get a civil conflict, international organizations should stay out of it and let the natives settle their affairs. It may seem more brutal, but it tends to set up a more stable future than leaving mutually-hostile populations interspersed. In the case of Serbia and Serbian-majority territories, the intervention was brutal, ruthless and totally demolished what would have been a strong ally of the Visegrad 4.

      My opinion is that any international intervention in a European civil war will pull the Muslim’s chestnuts out of the fire, leave the Muslims in European territory living in proximity to native Europeans, and will thoroughly represent the interests of the Deep State bureaucracy and globalists of Europe.

  16. Option no. 3 is what the newest political party in Sweden, AfS (Alternative for Sweden) is promoting. “Återvandring” – return migration. They laid out a plan to expel several hundred thousand migrants who have no positive economic outlook and/or are outright corrosive to society. They do talk about the real challenges to tackle such a project. Will be interesting to see how AfS fares in the elections.

  17. All of the proposals which I have seen, are predicated upon the supposition that “you” have control over the levers of power. (The State’ apparatus)

    The reality is that you have precisely NO control over the State … and that it is impossible to gain such control via the mechanisms of Democracy.

    This is easier to understand, once you use the proper terminology, and recognise that Democracy is no less than Socialism, and that you have spent the greater part of your life being deceived.

    It would be more profitable to disregard the immigrant, and concentrate upon the REAL enemies of freedom … Police and Bureaucrats are amongst the greatest of these.

    The immigrant is no more than a man who is taking advantage of the opportunities which are being presented to him by your own kith and kin.

    But, I think that Civil War is inevitable. Necessary, even. Just don’t be fool enough to fight at the behest of any Politician.

  18. One option that is not viewed much by “Western” folk is that there can be a diversity of opinions or “dogma” within a religious “community.” There are voices within Islam that portray violent, armed jihad as the fascist tool of cultural usurpers.

    The American Islamic Forum for Democracy and Muslims Facing Tomorrow speak to the idea of separation from the fascist tools of totalitarian ideologies.

    Do “Western” folk see any value in supporting the civil war that struggles for the “soul” of Islam? Did Radio Free Europe support the independence of Eastern Europe? Does controlling immigration in a fashion that emphasizes the freedom to choose, the freedom of thought, the freedom of worship, the freedom of speech, the abolition of slavery, the end of economic subsidy, the end of dependency on elites appeal to “Western” tax payers?

    • Good idea.

      Previous reform movements – Ahmadiyya, Bahai, Druze (leave aside the theology, but that’s what these all seem like to me de facto) haven’t fare too well. This probably wouldn’t either, though it’s CERTAINLY worth trying.

    • I’m reading Robert Spencer’s “The History of Jihad…” right now.

      One recurring theme is that Islamic rulers themselves wax hot and cold on fundamental Islam. You’ll have a ruler who tears down temples and crucifies Hindus. His son stops all Islamic observances and seems a hair’s-breadth away from actually converting to Christianity. But, here’s the generalization: In a succession of rulers, you always get one who is strictly and fundamentally Islamist, who enforces sharia law exactly as written and interpreted. Under this type of administration, art is destroyed, education is wiped out, communities are demolished, and the line between humiliation and physical coercion to attain converts becomes very, very blurred. In other words, once you get an Islamist regime, there is no chance of recovery. All previous knowledge and organization is destroyed.

      So, whether Amadiyya, Druze, and Ismaili (another peaceful Muslim sect) are real Islam reforms, or simply stalking horses as a last resort when the pressure becomes too great, it is a bet-your-life situation to assume that the Islam of these sects is permanently denatured. The Ba’hai are not considered to be Islamic anymore, either by the Ba’hai or by Muslims. But the Ba’hai are a thoroughgoing sect with its own problems.

  19. So here are my thoughts:

    The main part of the problem is the “welfare sponging” part of that population. Not showing up to a job disconnects you from the real world and that’s a big part of the problem. This isn’t unique to this population. The same happens with trust fund babies (Trudeau!), for example.

    There is also a tendency to be short-term focussed.

    So here’s what I’d do. I’d cause people to self-select.

    Welfare benefits for the target population get turned down 5%/month.

    UNLESS they verifiably relocate to their country of origin, in which case FULL benefits are paid for a maximum of 5 years, at the original rate even if they’d had some cut-down already. Then the 5%/month starts (from the original sum, not the remaining amount, meaning that 20 months later, it’s 0).

    For the first 1 year, they’re allowed to come back (but benefits are cut IMMEDIATELY).

    For the 2nd year, they’re allowed to come back ONLY IF THEY REPAY ANY BENEFITS received in the 2nd year so far.

    For the 3rd year, they’re allowed to come back ONLY IF THEY REPAY ALL BENEFITS received while abroad.

    For the 4th year, they’re allowed to come back ONLY IF THEY REPAY ALL BENEFITS received in their LIFETIME.

    After that, there’s no coming back.

    Seems generous? It is. It’s probably cheaper than any forcible method. It’ll also self-select the people that you DON’T want. Short-term thinkers will figure that they’ll take a year’s holiday at “home” and then come back. Living at “home” is probably cheaper, anyway. They’ll live like kings on the benefits. Then they’ll stay partway into year 2 and get caught into not being able to come back. Especially since by then, there will be some bureaucratic processing time…

    I’ll be that significant numbers could be “dealt with” in this way. Significant numbers would also at least join the work force, which will help in deradicalization.

    Nobody gets killed, nobody gets hurt. Savings are made, long-term.

    If it doesn’t work, then harsher options may need to be tried. But perhaps it might be enough to sort a lot of the mess out…

    • Mike, ‘nobody gets killed, nobody gets hurt’ works in a civilized society – however, that is not what we’re dealing with here. We’re dealing with a culture of hate and submission that is already at war with us. In a war, people get killed. Sadly, but it’s what happens. Our decision as men of the west is: “who dies?”
      It will either be “us”, or “them” – and their syncophants…
      I’ve made my decision. As for me and my house…

    • All this will do is generate huge numbers of muslims in the middle east who entered and left Britain 5-6 times under different passports and are now living like kings.

    • Mike,

      I like your approach. You try to look at the reality, and gauge your policy towards a desired future, with a plans for progress to that goal and contingency plans to maintain the desired benefit.

      I’m not a fan of government welfare anyway. Could you tell me the benefits of your plan, as opposed to simply cutting off all government benefits to immigrants, children, and grandchildren of immigrants immediately. The one government benefit they would still be able to get is free, one-way transportation to any country they reasonably claim is their home country.

      Your 5% monthly cutoff could profitably be used for native-born welfare and benefit recipients. Unless you believe government creates money, goods and services out of the thin air, this will release great resources for domestic uses, like real charities.

      Perhaps the people most affected by this would be retirees dependent on Medicare and social security. I happen to be in that category myself. Although I have substantial savings and investments, my lifestyle is such that social security covers 100% of my everyday living expenses. This means I use my savings for things like $2000 camera, $3000 gaming computer, $1000 for a gaming station, etc. I’m considering buying a $1200 Note 9 phone, except that I can’t figure out any benefit to myself from upgrading from a Note 4, which meets every need I can imagine.

      If social security were withdrawn, I would have to dig into savings, with the result that my investment would be worth somewhat less than it is now when I die, whereas now, it seems like it goes up every year in spite of my spending.

      I’m saying this not to sound obnoxious (although it does sound obnoxious, even to me), but to show that often, the people you want to take care of don’t need as much care as you think. So, you’re far better off without a welfare state, but with immigrants, the extending of welfare is quite literally death.

      • It doesn’t sound “obnoxious” – that’s the way it ends up for anyone who starts out well and then conserves. I like to watch Dave Ramsey hand out financial advice (because it agrees with mine!).

        The rules are (1) no debt beyond a mortgage (we paid ours off back when the B was employed before the crash); (2)pay cash for cars – in other words, buy used and then drive the thing till it wears out. We bought a used car in 2005 and it’s still going, hardly any repairs. Of course, the B has to bang the dashboard sometimes to make the dashboard display behave. (3) pay off any credit card in full each month.

        We don’t have consumer habits; never did. So getting by with some left for organic foods suits us fine. We gave up vacations and eating out some years ago. It’s just not fun anymore with my bad back. Thank heavens I can afford a chiropractor 😉

        Forgot to link to Ramsey:

        It’s his latest: “Money, It Isn’t That Complicated” – Dave Ramsey Rant

        Had no idea he was still extant. I used to listen to him on the long commute to work.

  20. Is genocide only going to be a possibility when they start murdering Europeans em masse first? I’m all for not firing the first shot, I believe it to be a last resort, but Islam considers it its first.

  21. Why not simply ban Islam. Recognize it as hazardous to the general well being of an individual and the public as a whole. Deny it a place to take root and if you promulgate Islam in any insidious way, exile. Forget about religious tests. Islam is not a religion if your of the opinion that it is your terribly misinformed.

    • Hallmonitor – Simply banning Islam isn’t politically possible at the current time and, with millions of Muslims in western countries, it wouldn’t be possible without kicking off the civil war we wish to avoid.

      Also, Islam is a religion by any definition, although “cult” might be a better term. It is also a totalitarian political system. Why can’t it be both?

  22. John Guandolo and his team at Understanding the Threat.
    The Diminishing Choices for Americans
    Eleven years ago I sat in the FBI Washington Field Office with the Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the Counterterrorism Division and one other agent. I asked the SAC what she would do when the average American came to a deeper understanding of the Islamic threat than agents in the CT Division, and then those Americans, realizing they were left to fend for themselves, took matters into their own hands.
    She froze, turned slightly pale, and told me she never thought about it before. I had…a lot.
    Today, America stands at that place.×432.png
    Al Qaeda financier Abdurahman Alamoudi, in federal prison, was President Clinton’s Islamic Advisor×428.png
    Al Qaeda financier Abdurahman Alamoudi, in federal prison, created the Muslim Chaplain Program for the Department of Defense
    The U.S. Islamic jihadi leadership displays gross animus towards America. Islamic leaders: openly call for jihad against our President; build weapons training camps for children to learn how to kill people in schools and hospitals knowing judges will let them walk; publicly call for the holocaust of all Jews and then feign shock and surprise when their comments make it into the public realm; teach jihad in Islamic elementary schools then sue the county school board if citizens dare protest; and on it goes.×574.png
    Hillary Clinton’s closest advisor, Huma Abedin, is deeply entrenched in the U.S. jihadi network
    (read the rest at the link)

    • May I add a lot of the information to which you refer is found in Coughlin’s “Catastrophic Failure” An added benefit is that the Baron helped edit the book.

      One claim that you made, that Huma Abedin is deeply entrenched in the US jihadi network, has no basis in evidence. I have looked into the matter. I’m not saying she’s not involved: her family history is deeply involved with the Muslim brotherhood and she herself has had substantial relations with Muslim Brotherhood organs. But, I have not seen any evidence she is involved currently in US jihadi networks. I believe it’s important to distinguish statements of likelihood with statements of evidence.

      Incidentally, when Huma Abedin was actually acting as a government official under the Clinton administration, five Republican congressmen (led by Michelle Bachmann, asked for an investigation of the Muslim Brotherhood ties of Abedin and others. It was not an accusation, but a listing of questionable connections. Then senator McCain, never a friend of US national or security interests, jumped harshly on the proposal.

      To summarize my position: there is no evidence that Abedin has US jihadi connections, but extensive history of Muslim Brotherhood connections.

      • She [Huma Abedin] has deep Clinton connections. That ought be enough for anyone.

        By the way, Michelle Bachman ended up being chased out of Congress by Senator McCain and others. When you stand almost alone as a Republican representative in Congress, it gets lonely. My guess is that some senators and other Congresspeople brought pressure to bear on her big donors.

  23. It’s impossible to just have a civil war with 5 options. We now have nuclear nations on the other side (Pakistan and soon, Iran) and we have third party nations who are loose cannons like North Korea, Russia, China, now S. Africa? and the hash in Syria and Afghanistan and Iraq. The world mess now is like the Mother of Vietnam, with a potential for a civil war (the left and the Weather Underground), plus an exogenous war with Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, China + about ten other difficult problems that make these simple 5 options look like a Tonka Toy.

  24. There’s the best solution which is live together but announce to the Muslims that the French manifesto signed by Ex-president Sarkozy and Gerard Depardieu – among 250 other French celebs – must apply to Muslims and Islam/the Quran.
    The manifesto they signed says that the Muslim religious authorities must mark as obsolete, all the (108!!!!) passages in the Quran saying to kill all so-called “Infidel” Jews and Christians etc…
    By doing that, Islam will not longer be the worst thing existing in the world any longer.
    That should be a relief to Muslims to no longer be ranked the worst.
    Read the link here:
    Citing ‘Radical Islamists,’ Over 250 Top French Figures Sign Letter Condemning anti-Semitism
    Former president Sarkozy, five imams and actor Gerard Depardieu among signatories of open letter drafted by former Charlie Hebdo editor

Comments are closed.